[mythtv-users] CVS

[Scott Blomfield]

I guess maybe you have not been around here long enough to really
understand. It _was_ written down, and It made absolutely _no_
measurable difference. There was a FAQ entry that said "ATI All In
Wonder will not work for tv capture. Ever. No, not even with the GATOS
driver." and *still* there were people asking "Can I use my AIW tv
tuner?" _all the time_.

And that is just one question. Basically every question that was
answered in the faq received just as much traffic on list when there was
a faq, and so the faq was (rightly) deemed to be useless.

Do you know what most people who actually read the faq wanted out of the
it? I'll tell you. "Tell me what tv tuner to use, what motherboard to
use, what cpu to use, and how much ram to have." I know, because I went
there looking for that information. I know, because when the faq was
there, that was the single most asked question about the it. (Very
closely followed by the AIW).

The biggest problem, though, is that people by and large simply do not
read the faq; and that is what Isaac was trying to point out. You can
put it there. You can link to it from a bazillion different places. You
can refer to it on list (have you _seen_ how many pointers are given out
on list to _very_ specific parts of the mythtv howto?). You can do
almost anything, but the one thing we have learned here is that you
absolutely cannot _make_ people read the faq before they post. And
invariably, they wont... so now you have a faq that you can refer to on
list, and you are no better off than when you just had a howto to refer
to.

I hope this helps you understand the situation a bit better.



-----Original Message-----
From: MythTV at C4L [mailto:davidc-mythtv at connect4less.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:40 PM
To: Discussion about mythtv
Subject: RE: [mythtv-users] CVS

I think my original point was lost here because of the original title. 
I'm not just talking about the CVS version, though I'm sure it is
responsible for more than it's share of fodder on this list.

My point is, doesn't it seem that too many times that someone has to
reply with "search the list/archive" or "that has been answered several
times..."?

In these cases, I just think that once a question is asked more than
once, twice, three times-a-lady, (I digress) it should be written down
in a more obvious place.  Whether that be a FAQ, README, note to self,
liner notes, whatever, it would create less work for those that DO
want/need to search the list.



On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 10:18, Scott Blomfield wrote:
> > Isaac Richards writes: 
> >'Small CVS changes' wasn't an obvious enough subject line?
> 
> <P TONGUE="in cheek">
> Probably not. All future changes of this ilk should now have a subject
> line of "READ OR DO NOT RUN CVS MYTHTV!!!".
> 
> CVS should probably have a message on connect to this effect as well.
> 
> Additionally, MythTV should refuse to run without a magic number code
> that is distributed randomly in one of these messages.
> 
> A default make file should also be present that simply echoes "Read
the
> commits list before you compile, you insensitive clod!!!"
> 
> With your cooperation, I'm sure we can get this situation promptly
> resolved.
> </P>
> 
> Seriously folks, you're running CVS! You should be subscribed to the
> commits list. If you can't get it to run, then the FIRST thing you
> should be doing is going back over the commits list (you're
subscribed,
> right? And you're definitely not deleting email from after your last
CVS
> update, are you?)
> 
> It's really not that much to ask. If you feel that it is too much to
> ask, then do feel free to not run CVS... it is unrealistic to ask
Isaac
> to handle every single case that *you* could make a mistake...
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users