On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Stephan Beyer wrote:
> Jakub Narebski wrote:
>
> > By the way, should the survey be divided in pages, or simply use
> > headers to divide survey into sections?
>
> Divided pages have a psychological impact, they don't look much and you
> can say "Almost there!" on each page.
>
> But headers and one-page surveys have a big advantage for users that pay
> for Internet access per time unit: they can go offline, answer the
> questions, and go online again to submit the survey.
>
> So I've scrolled across your test survey on survs.com and I think it
> should be kept on one page. Looks nice and manageable.
I also prefer single page surveys; it would be better if this survey
was shorter (by the way, how long did you took to complete test survey?),
but there are so many interesting questions...
> > Third, where to send survey to / where to publish information about the
> > survey?
>
> This question leads me to a question that could be put into the survey:
>
> Where have you read about this survey? (optional)
> [Free form]
But where to add it? Additionally I'd rather limit free-form questions
to absolute minimum.
This is the question I was lacking, so I'll think about adding it to
the survey.
> So, some comments on the questions now:
>
> > About you
> >
> > xx. What country are you in?
>
> "What country do you live in?" perhaps?
This is better phrasing. Changed.
> > Getting started with GIT
> >
> > xx. How did you hear about Git?
>
> There is a typo on survs.com (hear_d_).
> Should this by the way be multiple choice?
> I have heard about Git several times before I tried it.
Good idea, I think, and doesn't lead to more work when analysing.
And it would perhaps make it easier to choose appropriate answer.
Changed.
> I will only quote from survs.com now:
>
> > told by friend (word of mouth)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ? :) I think this should be removed
O.K.
> > What other SCM did or do you use?
> >[..]
> > custom ( ) ( ) ( )
>
> custom?
I mean here custom, not published (or no longer existing) SCM; something
that would be hard to write about.
I agree that it is not the best phrasing.
> > 20. Which porcelains / interfaces / implementations do you use?
> > [ ] core-git
>
> Uh, this is ambiguous. Is this our git or some script on top of git?
> In both cases, this should be clarified.
There is "my own scripts" at the bottom; I mean here using no additional
porcelain, no interface on top of git command line.
But it is here for completeness only; however if you have some good
explanation for "core-git" option I can put it below this question.
> > 22. Which git web interface do you use for your projects/have installed?
> > (Web interfaces used by git hosting sites do not count[*])
> [...]
> > (*) Unless of cours you are hosting some git hosting site
> ^^^^^^^^ ^
> typo, but I'd rather do s/of cours // and s/$/./ :-)
Thanks. Done.
> > 26. How often do you use the following forms of git commands
> > or extra git tools?
> >
> > Never | Rare | Often
> | Not yet, but sounds cool ;-)
>
> No no :-)
>
> But I wonder if we could split the "Never" case into several cases with
> reasons like:
> - Do not know.
> - Not yet needed.
> - Other (did not understand; tried but did not work; ...)
>
> But this will perhaps bloat the question even more, so we should keep
> "Never", though I think the reasons could be interesting.
> Could some "Comments" field for question 26 help?
Now it is 'never/rarely/sometimes/often'. I think there are enough
free form questions that one can put his/her own comments about git
commands in this survey...
> Some other comment: I dislike that there is *one* "Reset" button for
> such matrix questions. But I guess you cannot change that?
Yes, this is canned web survey site. I can only send feedback,
but I guess so can you (unless this requires subscription/invite...).
> > 28. Which of the following features do or did you use?
>
> I think many of the possible replies have been used in several other
> questions before, e.g. in
> - 21. (gitk, git gui),
> - 24. (git bundle),
> - 26/27. (git gui, gitk, git stash)
> - ...
>
> But this question still seems to makes sense for:
> [ ] eol conversion (crlf)
> [ ] gitattributes
> [ ] reflog (ref@{23})
> [ ] shallow clone
> [ ] detaching HEAD <- I think several people could have used that without knowing
> [ ] commit templates
> [ ] integration with IDE/editor
> [ ] non-default hooks
>
> And btw:
> > [ ] working with dirty tree <- Eh? Is this a feature?
This is distinguishing feature. What I mean here that you can use
"git add" and "git commit" (not "git commit -a") and have some
uncommitted changes, like for example change of version in Makefile.
> Big thanks for your efforts,
> Stephan
You are welcome.
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
