I also think it is better to use name + years. "DebConf 2011" is "12th conference"
.. .ValessioBrito Citando Gerfried Fuchs <rho...@deb.at>: > Hi! > > * Hideki Yamane <henr...@debian.or.jp> [2010-08-15 15:37:40 CEST]: >> Hi list, >> >> at http://www.debian.org/News/2010/20100730 >> > Tenth Annual Debian Developer Conference >> >> No, it's "Eleventh" - since first debconf was debconf*0*... >> http://debconf0.debconf.org/ > > As this was brought up on debian-publicity, got myself confused and is > now again mentioned I really wonder if the renumbering is really worth > it. It still feels like hiding the existence of one of the former > debconfs for a (IMHO) rather dubious reasoning of not wanting to confuse > people. > > Personally I consider it very easy to state "the debconf number > corresponds to the yearname" - which is quickly and helpful and not > confusing at all. There is no reason to argument it "being a geek thing > and starting numbering at 0" which was handed around (and I agree with > that it might be confusing to non-geeks). > > Can the decision be evaluated again now that feedback is coming in > about the confusion on a to some degree regular basis - or at least can > we get an argumentation line on why we are actively hiding the existence > of a debconf for the benefit of reducing numbering confusion? > > Thanks, > Rhonda > -- > "Lediglich 11 Prozent der Arbeitgeber sind der Meinung, dass jeder > Mensch auch ein Privatleben haben sollte." > -- http://www.karriere.at/artikel/884/ > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100815144109.ga27...@anguilla.debian.or.at > > -- ://ValessioBrito.info > Comunicação e Tecnologia mobile: +55 71 VALESSIO _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
