C. Michael Pilato wrote on Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:11:20 -0400:
> On 10/27/2010 09:41 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> > 2. Let's think about users: they have different needs for Subversion:
> > just a client, client and server etc. There are different packages to
> > get Subversion to be installed and running. Some comes with just a zip
> > archive, others have some installation and configuration scripts.
> > That's what customers looking for.
> >
> > 3. From my point of view, it is more important for users to explicitly
> > mark packages that requires registration and email for download.
>
> Agreed. There's no need for our package descriptions to be anemic to the
> point of uselessness. Let the descriptions state exactly what folks will be
> getting (objectively -- this is not a playground for Marketing departments).
> I also agree that it makes sense to note those downloads for which
> "Registration is required". As a user, I'd want to know that stuff up
> front, too.
>
+1 to this direction.
As the page stands now, the "professionally supported and certified" is
just lots of words that add nothing over "maintained by". And
information-freeness is Bad.
> --
> C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on 2010-10-28 14:44:14 CEST