1 |
On Monday 07 November 2005 15:27, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
> ... |
3 |
> > Hmm, I'd like it, if we also (re)moved stage1 and stage2 from visible |
4 |
> > directory, and renamed stage3 to something more appropriate by the |
5 |
> > 2006.0. I mean, it will probably be confusing for a new user if the |
6 |
> > guide just says "Oh, we have this things that say 1 and 2 in the |
7 |
> > directory, but please ignore them and start from 3, because 1 and 2 are |
8 |
> > only for devs, k?" And it won't help, that old users will most likely |
9 |
> > continue to advice for stage 1 in so many support channels. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> I'm not sure if the removal of stages 1 and 2 will happen in time for |
12 |
> 2006.0, simply because it is a *very* heated issue and one that will |
13 |
> take some serious politics to get enacted. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I guarantee that I won't be a popular guy. *grin* |
16 |
|
17 |
That's where a bit of PR and marketing techniques could help... if you say |
18 |
"Release Engeneering decided to not release stage1 and stage2 for 2006.0." |
19 |
every user out there will try to kill you. |
20 |
Instead, if you announce "For 2006.0, Release Engeneering decided to unify the |
21 |
functionalities of the three installation stages you were used to in single |
22 |
Stage file that provides the same capabilities and flexibility with less |
23 |
complication." (and change the handbook along this direction) how can someone |
24 |
complain about that? |
25 |
|
26 |
It's just a matter of using the right words ;) |
27 |
-- |
28 |
gentoo-doc@g.o mailing list |