3 ms·
It's not at all obvious to 95% or more of the plugin users that this is just an API for a web service. I wouldn't say it's intentionally deceptive or anything,
by meowface 10y ago
It's not at all obvious to 95% or more of the plugin users that this is just an API for a web service. I wouldn't say it's intentionally deceptive or anything, but it's not an appropriate amount of notice.
- gkya 10y agoI guess when one is considering to use a package they're supposed to read its README file. If they can't be bothered, well, that's their problem, even pages of notices won't help.
- michaelmrose 10y agoSome concepts have upsides and downsides such that notice may be required in order that the individual can make an informed decision and if they choose poorly it's on them. Some ideas like this one are so bad that they shouldn't exist at all on the premise that the idea of spell checking requiring sending all your documents over http is so bad that anyone that runs it must perforce either not know or not understand because understanding would lead any reasonable party not to install it. Therefore the addon exists only as a trap for the unwary or the stupid and makes the plugin ecosystem worse for existing and thus ought to be deleted.
- stronglikedan 10y agoIt's a clear and concise notice that both explains the issue, and warns about the implications, in less than three sentences. To me, it's perfectly appropriate. If you're in the 5%, then you're done grokking the notice, and you can move on however you choose. If you're in the 95%, then you have all of the keywords with which to do your due diligence before proceeding.