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

Re: [RFR2] templates://ufw/{templates}

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 09:35:11PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> We could refine this by using something like:
> #flag:translate:3,4,9
> __Choices: Cups, DNS, Imap (Secure), Pop3 (Secure), SSH, Samba, Smtp, WWW, WWW (Secure)
> ...as only 3 choices are translatable stuff...but I indeed would avoid
> it because it will be harder to maintain for the maintainer is (s)he
> changes the list of choices.

Yes, I'm inclined to agree.

> "Allow the following services": they are not necessarily "following"
> and we conventionnally avoid sentences for synopsis. So "Authorized
> services" seems simpler to me.


I've used Justin's suggestion "Please choose the services that should
be available for incoming connections.", but other than that all agreed
and included. I wondered if "available to" would be better?

Jonathan Wiltshire

PGP/GPG: 0xDB800B52 / 4216 F01F DCA9 21AC F3D3  A903 CA6B EA3E DB80 0B52

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: