|Replies are listed 'Best First'.|
Re: Petty janitor post vandalism
by erzuuli (Friar) on Jan 06, 2020 at 15:51 UTC
Yeah, it is, kinda. But you've chosen to post anonymously, so you've ceded ownership of your nodes to the site. Live with it. Or log in.
I have to admit that I had a few misgivings about that one. However, the vote tally was clearly in favor of making the edit.
I do think that some of us are a little too aggressive in their weeding, but when the vote gets lopsided, it seems wise to take care of the problem without letting it fester.
If you disagree with my edits, you're free to /msg me privately. I'll happily share my thinking (which is, of course, why I leave the record).
haukex: Edit: s/h1/b/g (2019-12-22 07:09:13) 1/14/0
nothing else, especially no mention of "Updating the HTML tags to modern use"
I'm also pretty sure that we have help pages discouraging the use from h1 to h4 because they render extremely here.
Anyway I was always an advocate of better CSS settings in the monastery.
I adjusted them for me in a way that h1 doesn't bother me anymore.
I concur with jdporter that this is not a big drama, no matter what this ano-monk tries to pull out of it.
I did not, for pretty much the same reasons that haukex outlined in his reply. (One thing I'll add is that modern SEO guidance suggests that sites/pages are punished for abusing Hx elements.) Otherwise, I relied on my experience and intuition.
At 14:1, the direction of the vote tally was pretty clear (especially since I was reasonably certain I posted the lone "keep" vote). Other changes have been made with lower consideration ratios.)
Indeed, if it hadn't been an <H1> issue, I might've been tempted to quietly unconsider the node and move on.
Thus, my misgivings weren't whether the <H1> was going to be edited, but rather how to do so in a way that kept as much of the original voice, tone, and intent (while perhaps blunting the snarkasm a shade).
And as far as the other edits go, those were also thoughtful and considered. As I'm sure you're aware, the site's framework was developed under the rules of HTML ~3.x. Modern markup is different. We're supposed to use semantic elements and to close tags that need to be closed. (Such cleanup is a habit, something I've done pretty much since I first became a janitor.) Given that such changes do not affect the content of the node, it's hard to see them as "vandalism.")
(I also clean up common language mistakes such as misused "it's", "you're", "they're", and so on. When I mention it in my change notes, it's a gentle heads-up to the attentive.)
In any event, none of my changes were meant to be petty or to vandalize.
Like haukex, I generally prefer to handle such things quietly, privately /msg-ing the OP with suggestions.
My advice to the AM is, essentially, log in and post publicly. I continue to believe that transparency is the best way to contribute effectively.
P.S. I'm sure someone will chime in that this should be seen as another reason why anonymous posting should be disabled. I respectfully disagree.
fixing Log::Log4perl was Re: Petty janitor post vandalism
by Aldebaran (Deacon) on Feb 13, 2020 at 00:35 UTC
I was OP for that thread: getting Log::Log4perl to install on windows strawberry perl, and I was glad for all responses including the one in question here. Maybe because of the font it was rendered in, I did not go with the --notest install, which may have solved the problem I presented with. I don't know, because I got another response to add a line of code to one of the tests, and then it would pass. I did this latter thing and, voila, Log::Log4perl installed on windows 10. In doing so, I created a fork, a good exercise in itself.
I consider that thread "closed out" now for my purposes as OP, but maybe we can recall a bit of it to get some perl going here. I'm OP on another thread now, where afoken links to a challenge in Re: Perl Passion website:
Is fixing this not something that lies within reach, if someone (why not me) makes the right submissions and runs the proper tests?
Furthermore trwww said that the module had lost its maintainer and also identifies the bug as known bug on rt. ateague shows the line of code that needs to be added for windows: Re: getting Log::Log4perl to install on windows strawberry perl. Maybe, what I'm suggesting has already been done in the form of this repo, and I just haven't cottoned on to it yet.
This is our line of code, for line 448 in t/026FileApp.tlog4perl.appender.Logfile.mode = clobber
Or is it not worth fixing? The fix might be uglier be than the flaw, in particular if --notest is a quick and easy way past it.
I'm glad this came up so I could take a second bite at this apple.
Thanks for your comments,