Renaming as "Debian Reference"?
On Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:04:11PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Well, perhaps just "Debian Reference" would be suitable. It's really not
> quick if it's got a larger index than some other documents have contents :)
> I said attempts, not good descriptive manuals <shrug> What we currently have
> is quite inferior.
I am flattered. But authoritative name such as "Debian Reference" bears
big responsibility. (I am scared.) If no one objects, I will change
its title as you indicated or to the any good alternative name before
asking some one to package this as .deb for Debian.
After all, Josip, you are a doc-debian package other key documentation
> > Informative documents for specific topics:
> > * Debian META Manual
> Oh, I didn't know this was being updated.
"Jul 9 1998" (For English original) I hardly call it "updated".
> It seems as if it replaces the www.debian.org/doc/ddp pages, and I
> don't see much point in that...
That is true. But only if updated :)
> And the name "META Manual" is bad, most people won't understand what's it
> about it instantly.
In plain words of a non-native person, this is simply "Introduction to
the Debian Documentation".
> > Questionable contents:
> > --- Keep these just as archives and no links from front pages:
> I'd prefer to keep them listed but clearly marked as bad.
I agree. http://www.debian.org/doc/ddp should not contain direct links
to these but just a single link to the archived document lists.
PS: I CC this to sourceforge.net ML so translators and proof readers can
be updated about situation.
+ Osamu Aoki <email@example.com> @ Cupertino, CA USA +