Re: References, registrations
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 09:48:59PM +0200, Steffen Moeller wrote:
> Hi Andreas, have many thanks for your work on the registration info - I like it a lot. You
> have seen me changing the wording a bit, hope that was ok.
That's more than OK - that was what I was actually hoping for. Once we
are settled with a proper English wording I will enable translations for
this string. Thanks for your input!
> The page has not yet updated itself, so I cannot be too critical myself about it, though I
> knew autodock to have a fresh paper out, which is a nice use case for having both the
> citation and the registration info shown.
Let's wait for tomorrow. ;-)
> For the registration I have added a "Publication-URL" entry, which would need to span
> around the title (which is the way pubmed.org is shown them) or around the whole block
> (ugly?). This way this should work for all kinds of Blends and may also comprise dimploma
> theses or technical notes that one finds at many universities.
I'll add this nice idea soon.
> Just dreaming along a bit:
>
> * Would you be interested to show an icon of some sort? I thought that
> the favicon.ico of the URL that is given may be nice to show.
If you know actually how to do that - why not adding some sugar. We
currently have the problem that long pages are loaded a bot slow -
probably we might need some AJAX features in the not so far future - but
I have no experiences with this. It might be feasible to add
Publication-Icon - but I have no idea how keen people might be on
maintaining this information ...
> Otherwise
> preferable would be the icon that is mentioned in debian/menu, but I
> would not know how to implement that. The page already looks nice as
> it is, maybe it would be too much.
There is no reasonable access to this icon for the tasks tools.
> * Would there be a sufficiently easy away to directly link to the developer's page like
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/packagename.html
We have a link to packages.debian.org. We surely can add also a link to
the developer oriented page - I'm just afraid that we might overload the
page - but in principle there is no problem in doing so.
> * We need to get a paper out on this all - say when the freeze is spoken
> out loudly? It is then not unlikely to appear kind of in sync with the release.
What do you mean "we need to get a paper". I just updated the blends
doc today (and I just guessed you might have read this before doing
the change).
> * [CS]ould we link to the man pages of the respective program? Ubuntu has
> http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/intrepid/man1/autodock4.1.html
> and I would not mind seeing references to their site ... but I don't really
> know how to do this.
Hmmm, I would prefer to stay inside debian.org domain just for the
sake of consistency. Moreover I have few means to verify that this
page exists and remains to exist.
> Again, many thanks and greetings
Once we are at the topic of web tools: I'm really waiting for an answer
from you why you think that mgltools fit in your categories Friends /
Enhances-By / ... for autodocktools but you refuse to add the Enhances
field to the control file of mgltools-*. Having no answer to this
problem which I clearly fail to understand blocks somehow proceeding on
the Enhances topic. IMHO, using Enhances of the packages control field
is the perfect way to go in such cases.
Kind regards and thanks for your enhancements
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Klarmachen zum Ändern!
Reply to: