On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 09:41:54AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote: > > So, with something like "Special-purpose packages" or "Specialized > > installations" or whatever along those lines, *then* a menu with the > > Blends list (unsorted) and the possibility of going back just in > > case people see the list and think "heck, I have no idea about what > > this stuff is about"....then I'd say this is the way to go. > I personally don't have problems with changing this; however this would > open again the discussion about the names -- IMO we should be consistent > here. We can't call them "Specialized Installations" in the installer, > but "Debian Pure Blends" on the web page. Renaming would have a tail of > renaming it everywhere. Agreed. (And I don't think changing the name again is wise. Nor is reverting to the old name before blends.) So IMO "Debian blends" should be used alone here, but explained, something like this: [ ] enable Debian blends (customized Debian variations) And in the Blends menu I'd be in favor of not sorting them alphabetical, but by relevance. (And determining the relevance won't be easy, as we don't have useful metrics for this. So it will has to be guesswork.) +btw, I'm not sure how best present the choices for the Debian Edu blend, as Debian Edu has several installation options (eg mainserver, ltsp-server, workstation and standalone) and some can be combined. So I guess the chain of selections would be: [x] enable Debian blends -> [x] choose Debian Edu blend -> present the Debian Edu installation options to choose from again… [ ] edu main-server [x] edu ltsp-server [x] edu workstation [ ] edu standalone -- cheers, Holger
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature