On Saturday 06 September 2008, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > Adding support for armel to the manual seems rather easy. I came up > with the patch below that seems to work for me. Any comments?
The patch looks OK at first glance. I just hope no arch conditions have been forgotten. My main objections are: - Why add an extra architecture for only one release given that arm is going to be obsoleted with the next release? If we skip this now we could do a simple arm/armel rename for the next release. - Is it really worth the effort when the actual difference between the versions are so increadibly minimal? The same could be achieved by a simple added para explaining the differences. - The extra work caused for translators at this late stage. If this is going to be committed IMO at least the addition of the arch conditions should be done for all translations (the XML-based ones that is) and those translations should be "unfuzzied". -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
