Re: [Zope] Questions on ZODB BTrees versus bsddb BTrees
Hi Chris Yesterday you said: Chris> Not everything is as hard as some people manage to make it ;-) And today this | >> | $ cd Zope-2.0.0a3-src/ | Chris> And what version of Zope are we on now? and | Chris> But really, with Open Source, it's up to you to be the judge. If a That's 3 times where I somehow get to be in the wrong for taking the time to point out that a piece of documentation in the project is quite misleading. I do well understand that the principle of caveat emptor applies to open source. But, many people have worked for a long time on zope and they've spent so much time in packaging it up and making it available because they also want it to be used by others. That's one of the aims. It works against that aim if the documentation is misleading. And, it works against the aim of having more people involved if someone new and well-intentioned shows up, runs into what looks like a clear (and, yes, very minor) problem, takes the time to report it, and is then repeatedly told that they're in the wrong! | Chris> Well, by all means report this anachronism to zope-web@zope.org, and | Chris> someone will hopefully delete it. Ok, will do. | Chris> If a document is over 3 years old and mentions a version of Zope | Chris> that's *nine* point releases earlier than the one you're using, d'ya | Chris> not think it might be out of date? ;-) Sure. But when it's the only thing you have to go on, when the document is sitting on the official zope.org web site, and when it says something is separately downloadable, experience dictates that you ignore the mentioned version number and go looking for the latest version of that thing. Which is exactly what I did. BTW, I don't personally mind your reaction at all (and I did see the original smiley). I was trying to help yesterday. I'm trying to now too, when I say that I don't think it's in the best interests of the project to tell newcomers who run across problems that they're in the wrong because they were naive enough to read and rely on the documentation. Anyway, no hard feelings, and thank for your replies. Apologies for so many words. Regards, Terry
Terry Jones wrote:
That's 3 times where I somehow get to be in the wrong for taking the time to point out that a piece of documentation in the project is quite misleading.
You didn't say you thought it was misleading, you worded it as if you expected it to still be true. A small difference maybe, but we're all busy people ;-)
That's one of the aims. It works against that aim if the documentation is misleading. And, it works against the aim of having more people involved if someone new and well-intentioned shows up, runs into what looks like a clear (and, yes, very minor) problem, takes the time to report it, and is then repeatedly told that they're in the wrong!
Well, you didn't say "this is wrong, I want to fix it". You said "doing this thing that's obviously out of date should work, why doesn't it", which is a slightly different kettle of fish ;-)
Sure. But when it's the only thing you have to go on,
It's not. There's plenty of coverage both in the 2.6 book on zope.org and the 2.7 book on plope.org...
when the document is sitting on the official zope.org web site,
zope.org is a joke, despite many people's efforts. Get over it and move on to enjoying zope despite this ;-)
and when it says something is separately downloadable, experience dictates that you ignore the mentioned version number and go looking for the latest version of that thing. Which is exactly what I did.
I don't think that's correct. If you see an ancient version of any software mentioned in a doc, you might want to consider the validity of the document as a whole...
original smiley). I was trying to help yesterday. I'm trying to now too, when I say that I don't think it's in the best interests of the project to tell newcomers who run across problems that they're in the wrong because they were naive enough to read and rely on the documentation.
Well, okay, I'll try and make the point again: you need to think hard when reading docs... if it's ancient, it might well be out of date and wholely inaccurate to the point of being totally misleading, as in this case... cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
participants (2)
-
Chris Withers -
Terry Jones