[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian Project News 2010/09 frozen, please review and translate

On 2010-08-10 12:22, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:

Hi!

I just finished the last bits for the latest issue of the Debian Project
News to be release on Monday.  I would appreciate reviews and
translations.

Instructions can be found on http://wiki.debian.org/ProjectNews

As I finished this issue quite late (it should have been released
yesterday and frozen last friday), I would appreciate it, if it could be
reviewed faster than the usual two days.  Would it be possible, to send
it out tomorrow?


Best regards,
   Alexander




Thank you Alexander. Here are my remarks.


Also, if your package is involved
in an ongoing transition, don't upload a new version until it migrates.
Perhaps "As usual, if...". I'm not sure this is wanted, this is neither news nor quite exact (you may want to upload a security fix in some cases, for example). 


The 2010 annual Debian Developer Conference, DebConf10, which was held
at Columbia University in New York City, ended last Saturday on 7 August,
2010.
"7 August, 2010", with the comma, doesn't seem right. It looks like a mix of "Month Day, Year" and "Day Month Year". 
The Release Team delivered
a quick but concise talk about their status and announced the<a
href="http://www.debian.org/News/2010/20100806";>immediate
freeze of<q>Squeeze</q>.</a></p>
This was already discussed above. The news refer to the release team in turn as the "Release Team", the "Debian Release Team" and the "Debian project Release Team". 


For those who couldn't attend the conference, and would like to watch the
talks, many sessions were streamed by the DebConf video team composed of
over 40 volunteers.

There should be a comma before "composed".


During the last few weeks,<q>netinst</q>  CD images (containing
the installation system and all packages for the base system,
downloading everything else from the Internet) have been available
which also contain the partly non-free firmware files needed (e.g.) for
some network and WLAN controllers.

This is a little redundant, WLAN controllers are network controllers.


DebianEdu, who adapt Debian for the special needs of schools and
similar institutions,<a
href="http://lists.debian.org/2fltynl2bfo.fsf@login2.uio.no";>released
their first test version</a>  based uopn Debian
<q>Squeeze</q>.

s/uopn/upon/
I believe "who adapt" should be "which adapts".


See the
<a
href="http://blends.alioth.debian.org/debichem/tasks";>overview</a>  of
chemical application packages in Debian and task
<a
href="http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/blends/projects/debichem/trunk/debichem/tasks/";>definition
in the Subversion repository</a>.

An article is missing before "task definition".


While Annual Debian Developers Conference 2010 has just ended,
preparations for the 2011 conference have already begun.
DebConf10 is *the* 2010 Annual Debian Developers Conference, but I don't think "Annual Debian Developers Conference 2010" is a proper noun. 


Anthony Towns published<a
href="http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTi=EHE=tApjwL+kKYEtJMzy7_ybGfqUeTZOAK8kV@mail.gmail.com";>several
statistics</a>  about Debian, including the average time needed to close
bugs and the number of release-critical bugs.
Am I doing something wrong or is this link broken? Does give me something but nothing from Anthony. 


According to the<a href="http://bts.turmzimmer.net/details.php";>unofficial
	release-critical bug counter</a>, the upcoming release,
	Debian 6.0<q>Squeeze</q>, is currently affected by
245 release-critical bugs. Ignoring bugs which are easily solved
	or on the way to being solved, roughly speaking, about
145 release-critical bugs remain to be solved for the
	release to happen.
Assuming this is valid as of August 6 (based on http://blog.schmehl.info/Debian/rc-stats/2010-31 ), the high number is misleading. If I see 245 affect squeeze, I would basically expect to find that number if I select "squeeze" in the RC bugs count. But I get 323. The reason is squeeze-only bugs are subtracted from the squeeze bugs, since they are fixed.
I agree bugs fixed in unstable can be very easily ignored at this point, so I'm not against ignoring fixed bugs in the high number, but then that's how it should be presented (is currently affected by 245 *unfixed* release-critical bugs).
Reply to: