This is Gentoo's testing wiki. It is a non-operational environment and its textual content is outdated.
Please visit our production wiki at https://wiki.gentoo.org
Talk:Libav
From Gentoo Wiki (test)
Note
This is a talk page. Please add newer comments below older ones, and sign your comments using four tildes (
This is a talk page. Please add newer comments below older ones, and sign your comments using four tildes (
~~~~).
When adding a new section (at the bottom of the page), please mark it as "open for discussion" by using {{talk|open}} so it will show up in the list of open discussions.Should be compared to FFmpeg
Talk status
This discussion is done as of May 16, 2017.
Neither this article nor FFmpeg tries to explain why one would choose one package over the other. I assume there are reasons, otherwise why have two different packages (politics notwithstanding). - dcljr (talk) 09:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
- Okay. That may be true. Perhaps you could do the research and enhance the articles to show why one would choose one over the other. There's nothing to discuss further in my opinion. --Maffblaster (talk) 18:34, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- Matthew Marchese (Maffblaster) : When I make such comments, I'm hoping that someone will read it who already knows something about the workings of at least one of the packages — or cares enough about at least one of them to want to do the "research". Frankly, neither applies to me. But I can recognize the lack of useful content, so I flag it on the talk page. I imagine the same can be said about most of the similar comments around the wiki that you are closing as "nothing to discuss". Not all "open" comments are asking for actions from admins. Many are just asking for other, more informed users to weigh in. - dcljr (talk) 18:48, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Dcljr , do you propose these discussions remain open indefinitely? In other words, should 'discussions' such as these remain open as pending, todo items until someone comes along whom 1) finds the open discussion, 2) has the time, 3) has the knowledge (or at lease researches until they find/have the knowledge), and 4) actually is willing to use 2 and 3 (the time and the knowledge) to improve the article then 5) their self (or someone else comes along) to validate the content as been added and close the discussion?
- I have a couple of issues with this. First, in my opinion, it goes against the point of having the talk template. This template exists to provide status of the discussion. This template was created to be used when someone reverts or doesn't agree with the changes to the main article by another user. It presumes work was done, but is disputable. That being said, I realize the Example given on the Help page shows someone asking for others to provide more information on a topic. Which is fine by me, feel free to ask away, but please don't use the talk template for it.
- Second, there are other templates that exist on the wiki that can be used to identify articles that are lacking content. You could use Template:InfoBox_todo or create a new kind of template that doesn't exist yet in order to use for the purpose you're desiring. Let me know what you think... it would seem that putting some 'todo' items in the main article would get a lot more visibility from the readers, and would make updates more likely to happen. Kind regards, --Maffblaster (talk) 21:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- I started to reply to this, but it got too long (and, obviously, off-topic for this article) to post here. I plan to post about this at some point at Gentoo Wiki:Feedback where other interested parties can weigh in on the matter. - dcljr (talk) 03:42, 8 June 2017 (UTC)