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

Re: How much unbranding in Debian templates

Quoting Helge Kreutzmann (debian@helgefjell.de):

> Then for this case the way "out" would be to simply state that. Since
> -However, since the Debian policy requires
> +However, since .. is required in (all) Linux distributions

Which becomes untrue as Debian!=Linux. Tricky, isn't it? :-)

> > About the point raised by Helge: I don't really see why "the
> > distribution" would be less clear than "Debian".
> Because the user does not know where to look. Maybe I'm spoiled from
> Science, but I'm used to be able to look things up. And "the
> distribution policy" sounds very vague to me (and I understand
> distribution here as a means to hand things out (=distribute), so I
> don't know if the term is used in its general sense, or in the sense
> of a Linux distribution). On the other hand, "Debian policy" is a very
> well defined term which users can clearly look up or Google for.

Sure, but the thing to look might be different whethe rone is using
Debian or something else. So, our only choice is either being precise
and specific.....and use branding......or being vague and leave up to
the user to look for a reference that's suited for the distribution
(s)he's using.

After all, we might as well say simply "As the default shell is
required to be POSIX-compliant" which is certainly true.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: