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

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
maintainer.

> > 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.

Regards,
Osamu

PS: I CC this to sourceforge.net ML so translators and proof readers can
be updated about situation.
-- 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+  Osamu Aoki <debian@aokiconsulting.com> @ Cupertino, CA USA         +



Reply to: