Re: Release notes
Justin B Rye wrote:
> Martin Eberhard Schauer wrote:
>> today #703419 was filed. Perhaps somebody here is interested working
>> on its subject: release-notes: need updating / finalizing for Wheezy.
>
> Okay, first things first: I still see things in the Wheezy Release
> Notes that I provided improved phrasings for when they were the
> Squeeze Release Notes. It would be nice to have some sort of
> assurance that this time I'll finally be allowed to fix (for instance)
> the references to aptitude's "visual" mode, AKA (in the "What's-New"
> section) "interactive" use. After all, even on the commandline,
> aptitude is *always* visual (unless you're using a Braille terminal or
> something), and as interactive as "cp --interactive".
>
> Instead can we please use a term that actually describes this mode in
> a manner that new users might have a chance of understanding? I
> suggest "full-console mode", but I'm open to better suggestions.
No answer. Perhaps nobody's interested in having the Release Notes
translated into English this time after all. Still, maybe that's
because there's plenty of time left and we're only on the stage of
getting the approximate content straight?
Mind you, to repeat my ritual once-per-release-cycle whinge, this task
would be much easier if we weren't trying to turn a list of things
that were new-in-Squeeze into a list of things that are new-in-Wheezy
by filing piecemeal bugreports on individual paragraphs. I've never
understood why we don't *start* by automatically deleting (or at least
clearly commenting out) all the perishable stuff.
Just in case anybody's relying on the proofreading stage to catch the
last few stale bits, here's my catalogue of the ones that don't seem
to have been pointed out so far (unless they're hidden away in
bugreports I didn't notice):
installing.dbk:
Software speech support is no longer a new feature.
issues.dbk:
Are the udev warnings stale or are we assuming they're perennial?
(At the least, udev(8) is now udev(7)...)
upgrading.dbk:
How urgent is the reboot into a new kernel this time?
Does deborphan still work well enough to recommend these days?
The firmware move is old, old news
The cryptoloop support stuff is stale
The expected-removals list is stale
We need to avoid talking about gdm as if it was in Wheezy
The changes to sudo configuration are stale
Does kernel-package still work well enough to recommend these days?
The hardware discovery order and boot-timing issues are stale
So much stale material...
whats-new.dbk:
Isohybrid images aren't "a new feature" any longer.
Ditto the default installation of Recommends.
Ditto stable-updates replacing volatile.
There's also some bad advice in a couple of places that confuses two
quite different senses of "obsolete": leftover unnecessary libraries,
and packages no longer in Debian. They need untangling.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: