Re: roadmap editing
Am Mittwoch, 24. Oktober 2007 schrieb Petter Reinholdtsen:
> [Kurt Gramlich]
> > i disagree with the handling of contributers in the debian edu
> > wiki page
> > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/roadmap
> > - * Bug:1064 samba configuration needs to be corrected for domain
> > logons
> > just to delete this line without discussion demotivates people
Don't worry about my motivation ;-)
I'm still alive but under heavy load @work
> Why? Do you mean that all bugs should be listed in the roadmap? If
> not, what make this bug special and in need of a listing in the
Nothing makes it special. It was written there, because there was a
sentence like: 'here we collect things for ...', if I remember
correctly. So I believed that it may be something like a notepad for
things to remeber and wrote down that this point (the bug # 1064) is in
my opinion still an important one.
> Why is it it not enough motivation to have it listed in
Nobody said that, why do you ask?
The point is Kurt's disagree in his first sentence :'I disagree with the
handling of contributers ...'.
And as the contributor I say:' it is not the fine english art to wipe
away content and declare then a kind of prohibition afterwards in place
for further editing.'
But, it's a wiki, so if I don't agree with that kind of prohibition, I'm
free to wipe it away. And AFAIK is the debian wiki not a protected site
for registered users.
As it was not the first time, minds from contributors have been wiped
out without discussion or notes, I don't worry about, because I know
who did it. ;-)
> The roadmap is not ment to list all the bugs we want to
> fix (we got bugzilla and the priority system there to track that), it
> is for planned features and improvements.
And so it was ment, as a reminder for improvement.
This BUG was opened 2006-02-19 21:38. So it is an older one and it was
discussed several times. So my note of the BUG on the wikipage was ment
as a reminder like on http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Status/Etch
> I believe that the samba config work with Windows XP. Is this wrong?
Maybe it works, I didn't test it since months.
But others wrote on firstname.lastname@example.org that, in short, that they aren't
satisfied with the provided concept of the implementation of samba in
So there is a need of improvement, I believe.
> The bug seem to talk about Windows 9x and NT, and I believe neither
> is supported by Microsoft any more. Is the windows machines affected
> by this bug still supported by Microsoft?
If you read bug #1064 at http://bugs.skolelinux.no/1064 in detail, you
can see that with NT are all versions ment, that are _not_ win9x.
> > it is important, to get R1 runing without problems with window
> > workstations, that means a corrected and improved smb.conf
Over all said above, more thinking before deleting is saving time and
Greetings to all, Jürgen Leibner