Re: Update on "New Maintainers Corner" web page
Hi, sorry for delay.
In <20000912210156.Z10037@ftoomsh.progsoc.uts.edu.au>,
on "Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:01:57 +1100",
Anand Kumria <wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 10:14:46AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Any ideas what the problem might be?
I don't know the detail, but web site generation process did
have some problems, maybe. Anyway now it has been updated for days.
> Anyway from what I read it looked like you have mixed in the new
> identification text with the previous one.
Yes.
> I found it a lot harder to read, and it is still inaccurate. I think
> just copying Dale's text verbatim would be more useful.
Well, I'd like to consult Dale about this. But my personal opinion is
to make pages more integrated, rather than to "just copy that text verbatim".
No, I don't think the current pages are best, and if you or someone can
provide me better solution, I will appreciate it. As written above,
"just verbatim copy" is not better one for me.
I'll update nm-step2 using the text in nm-amchecklist. I think step2
should be simplified by putting "Conditions" into main part, instead of
splitting step2 into two parts. But I can't make better idea to do it now.
> It may also be simpler (wrt) the GPG problem to say something like:
>
> - ElGamal keys must be generated by GPG > 1.0.2
Hmm. I'll reflect this.
> Perhaps with a link to the archive of James' message with the full
> explanation for those who want/need it.
I don't know where that link is. If anyone know, please send it to me.
Will move them from nm-step2 into nm-amchecklist.
--
Taketoshi Sano: <sano@debian.org>,<sano@debian.or.jp>,<kgh12351@nifty.ne.jp>
Reply to: