On Friday 03 June 2005 18:54, Christian Perrier wrote: > Others opinions are welcome. I imagine that some people could object > to us slowly removing "Debian" everywhere to make the installer very > neutral (too neutral....or even more too "Ubuntu-friendly"). Let's please not throw away the child with the bathwater. IMO "Debian" should be kept in places where removing it could lead to confusion for users. By all means use neutral wording where it is superfluous, but don't make brand neutralization the primary goal. > > Template: mirror/suite > > Type: select > > _Choices: stable, testing, unstable > > _Description: Debian version to install: > > Debian comes in several flavors. Stable is well-tested and rarely > > changes. Unstable is untested and frequently changing. Testing is a > > middle ground, that receives many of the new versions from unstable > > if they are not too buggy. > > > However, we can at least use more neutral wording anyway: > > "The operating system comes in several flavors. .../..." I think this is wrong. Debian is much more than an "operating system". You could call it "distribution", but that may be confusing as well as I see ppl using the term distribution to individual releases as well. > About translating the flavors names, actually 21 languages translate > them and 18 don't.... IMO they should not and we should probably tell them so. Maybe we need some "general translation guidelines". > The french team (widely known to translate *everything*) finally > decided to keep the English names for the flavors. We just added the > initial capitals which make the template look nicer...:-) > > IMHO, if these are translated, the original English names should be > kept for reference anyway.... Absolutely. > > cdrom-detect has: > > > > Template: cdrom-detect/wrong-cd > > Type: error > > _Description: Non-Debian CD-ROM detected > > The CD-ROM drive contains a non-Debian CD. > > . > > Please insert a Debian CD to continue with the installation. > > > > What's good wording here? "The CD-ROM drive contains a CD which > > cannot be used for installation", and "Please insert a suitable CD", > > perhaps? "Non-Debian" is inaccurate anyway, since it only tests for > > /cdrom/.disk/info, which any distribution that uses debian-cd will > > have. > > My proposal: > > _Description: Incorrect CD-ROM detected > The CD-ROM driver contains a CD which cannot be used for > installation. > . > Please insert an operating system installation CD. > (Noone will actually imagine inserting a Windows CD, right? :-)) I think you have too much faith in users; in my experience they are capable of the weirdest things ;-) Again Debian <> OS. IMO "Debian installation CD" is the only correct description here that tells users what to do if they manage to get themselves on this dialog. > > choose-mirror talks about "the Debian archive" or "Debian archive > > mirror" a lot. I suppose that could just be "the archive" and > > "archive mirror", maybe? Not entirely obvious. > > Sounds fair to me. Yes, especially as the mirrors listed will be Debian mirrors anyway. > > I have a local diff for part of netcfg, but I'm not sure what to do > > about this: > > > > Template: netcfg/no_default_route > > Type: boolean > > _Description: Continue without a default route? > > The network autoconfiguration was successful. However, no default > > route was set: the system does not know how to communicate with hosts > > on the Internet. This will make it impossible to continue with the > > installation unless you have the first official Debian CD-ROM, a > > 'Netinst' CD-ROM, or packages available on the local network. > > . > > If you are unsure, you should not continue without a default route: > > contact your local network administrator about this problem. > > "first official complete CD-ROM" sounds reasonable to me. Neutral > enough and not really prone to confusion. That should be "first full binairy CD-ROM" I think. As this is a dialog that's only shown in edge cases, I think this is OK. > More generally speaking, replacing "Ubuntu" or "Debian" by "the > operating system" when possible seems to be a good compromise. Disagree strongly. See above.
Description: PGP signature