> Quoting a recent post by Sam Roberts:
Since this came up again, I want to leave a couple of comments on this
post — from my point of view as a library author — which does not
necessarily match my point of view as a library user :-P
<...>
>> lua-l is getting high traffic, and checking out other people's
>> libraries to see what their value
>> proposition is is time consuming. A few lines about what it does is
>> useful.
If a reader does not have time to check out other library — he should
skip it. This is a basic survival rule in the informationally
oversaturated environment.
If library author did not bother to make announcement interesting
enough for a particular reader — then maybe this announcement is not
intended for this reader.
>> Announcements about "binding to foozit-3", should say what foozit-3 is for, so
>> readers who've never heard of foozit might realize its what they've always
>> wanted and never knew existed.
That may be true only if announcement author does bother to bring his
word to such readers. If a reader is too lazy (or busy) to click a
link (or google something up) — maybe he is not a target audience for
the announcement.
>> Announcements of alternatives to existing libraries (yet another
>> bitop, unit test,
>> binding approach, etc.), should mention some of the distinctive features vs
>> its competitors.
Only if an author does want to promote his library this much.
* * *
The original post above does raise valid points of course, but, IMO,
it should not be viewed as a some basic netiquette rule to be rudely
sticked up the nose of every announcement author — or maybe next time
an author would think twice before announcing something on the list.
(Not me — I have a thick skin. :-P )
Alexander.
