search

Stericson / busybox-free

Busybox - free
38 stars 19 forks source link

Please provide at least a basic Readme #3

Open alexanderadam opened 9 years ago

alexanderadam commented 9 years ago

So people will get a basic overview what the project does, how the source / codebase is different from the other variants ([1] [2] [3])

Depending on what the readme contains, this issue is perhaps related to the other two issues #1 and #2. :wink:

ghost commented 7 years ago

I don't really see the purpose of a readme though. The name and project structure is already self-explanatory :>

ghost commented 7 years ago

If you want, send a pull. Else, this is not a issue anyways, so close this "issue"

alexanderadam commented 7 years ago

@techdude18

  1. to have a basic readme is so common that even Github will ask you to create one when you create a repository. Actually it is even common to document any tools things in any *nix, which is why man pages are omnipresent as well. And what is "self-explanatory" may for a Java developer may not be "self-explanatory" for another person. Claiming that would probably be as arrogant as a mathematician claiming that the explicit formula for the prime count function is "self-explanatory" to someone who just knows basic math. Even for Java developers who want to contribute it is necessary to know what rules and styleguides should be followed for a PR. There isn't even a License file in the project root. So having a readme is pretty much a minimum standard. Larger projects usually have even more documentation than just a readme.
  2. Claiming that an issue is just allowed to exist if the person who created it open an PR makes absolutely no sense. As I explained in 1.), having a Readme is pretty much a standard in open source projects. If documentation is missing, it's pretty much a bug. An open bug is one of the most legitimate reason for an open issue.
ghost commented 7 years ago

Yep, we have different viewpoints i guess. Thanks for enlightening, but i don't really think that a readme is necessary. If you think that a readme is seriously needed, then make your own and send a pull then. Some developers have too many projects to handle that they dont have the time to make one

alexanderadam commented 7 years ago

Yes, is obvious that you have a different viewpoint. However, even if you disagree with the majority of professional developers you should at least accept that they obviously have a different opinion. Usually most developers discuss what is the minimum of information in a readme. Not whether they should exist.

However, just rethink what you just wrote. Because, I would definitely send a PR if I would have the expertise for the tooling used here. Or which license Stephen was intended to use. Or which pitfalls may occur. But I don't have the expertise. I can't answer these questions.

I totally understand that not everyone has time to work on OSS but this wasn't the point here. You just came along commenting and trolling. Nobody here demanded that a readme must be written within a few months or such.