|
2009-10-11
, 12:11
|
|
Posts: 3,159 |
Thanked: 2,023 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Finland
|
#22
|
Personally, I hate those kind of warnings. They are addressing the issue from the wrong (=negative) angle.
Suppose I'm not a developer, I'm not an experienced tester and I really don't know what I'm doing. How is that ever going to change if I follow warnings like this? The only way to learn what is going on is to ignore warning like this and try it anyway. The only way to become an experienced tester is to test software which actually has bugs, etc.
The warning should really be phrased positive, e.g. "Feel free to play with this software, but be aware that..." And add the 'Restore factory image' instructions in there, doing so will scare more people away then any warning will.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ossipena For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-10-11
, 12:30
|
Posts: 8 |
Thanked: 4 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#23
|
If one is determined to install unstable software, he will do that no matter what disclaimers there are. I bet that even when disclaimer is negative, there will be enough testers (at least guys who now own n8x0s and are part of community and somewhat familiar about maemo).
Positive warning sounds like sleazy car salesman that sells you $2000 car for $5000 and gives wrong contact info so warranty is void before your taillights disappear. ("this is just formality to sign here, the text doesn't matter, not worth reading it through. Just sign! ... I promise there will be no problems.")
It totally is the wrong way to get testers. Luring innocent fools to get their shiny new devices to a point that a reflash is needed is not the publicity maemo community needs...
The Following User Says Thank You to duckyduck For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-10-12
, 08:51
|
|
Posts: 3,105 |
Thanked: 11,088 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ Mountain View (CA, USA)
|
#24
|
The question I have is: why is the package manager not smart enough to refuse to install applications in the wrong location? (with a special developers mode that you need to enable by shell or something) Or simply correcting the install path.. It would force the developer to think about and install in the correct location.
The Following User Says Thank You to qgil For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-10-12
, 09:00
|
Posts: 883 |
Thanked: 980 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ Bern, Switzerland
|
#25
|
The Following User Says Thank You to twaelti For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-10-12
, 09:31
|
Posts: 337 |
Thanked: 160 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
@ München, DE
|
#26
|
In German:
Warnung
Diese beiden Quellen sollten nur von Entwicklern oder erfahrenen Benutzern eingetragen werden.
Sofern nicht anders angegeben, kann nicht ausgeschlossen werden, dass alle in diesem Thread erwähnten Programme die Funktionsweise Ihres Gerätes ernsthaft beeinträchtigen könnten.
The Following User Says Thank You to range For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-10-12
, 10:15
|
|
Posts: 2,121 |
Thanked: 1,540 times |
Joined on Mar 2008
@ Oxford, UK
|
#27
|
Extras-devel and -test shouldn't have .install files in my opinion, so that they would neeed to be added manually.
|
2009-10-12
, 10:51
|
|
Posts: 3,404 |
Thanked: 4,474 times |
Joined on Oct 2005
@ Germany
|
#28
|
|
2009-10-12
, 11:00
|
Posts: 3,841 |
Thanked: 1,079 times |
Joined on Nov 2006
|
#29
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TA-t3 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-10-12
, 11:22
|
|
Posts: 2,869 |
Thanked: 1,784 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Po' Bo'. PA
|
#30
|
Aren't the .install files a relic of the old days with lots of different repositories anyway?
The idea behind an .install file (to install application from webbrowser) is good but it should not modify the list of repositories anymore. The system should only accept .install files for repositories that the user has already configured, IMHO.
I realize that's a separate issue, but it's also part of the user experience that isn't going to impress the new crowd.