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

Re: Debian WWW CVS commit by peterk: webwml/english/News/weekly/2004/01 index.wml



On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 04:10:33PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Debian WWW CVS <webmaster@debian.org> [2004-01-08 13:08]:
> > Log message:
> > 	Rephrased paragraph about meta-gnome2, keeping it out hinders proper GNOME,
> > 	not the other way around.
> 
>  Uhm, I am not sure if I understand your correction correctly: Can
> someone please proofread if the correction is in fact correct?
> 
> #v+
>  <code>meta-gnome2</code> packages.  He listed 13 packages that bear one or
>  more problems.  Each of them is a reason to keep <code>meta-gnome2</code> out
> -of the testing distribution, which is required for proper GNOME in sarge.
> +of the testing distribution, which stops proper GNOME in sarge.
> #v-
> 
>  From my understanding the old version was more clear. meta-gnome2 is
> required for proper GNOME in sarge.
> 
>  Oh, I see your misunderstanding: You think the "which" corresponds to
> the keeping out of meta-gnome2, not meta-gnome2 itself. But your change
> doesn't really clear what the which corresponds to.
> 
>  Can someone please suggest a rephrase to make it clear?

"Each of them is a reason to keep <code>meta-gnome2</code> out of the
testing distribution. That package is required in order to have a
properly working GNOME in sarge."

(Also, you don't really "bear" problems, you simply "have" them.)

-- 
Colin Watson                                  [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]



Reply to: