On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 23:32, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 10:46:15PM -0500, Alexander Winston wrote: > > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 22:19, Colin Watson wrote: > > > --- testing.wml 18 Sep 2003 16:07:07 -0000 1.17 > > > +++ testing.wml 9 Nov 2003 03:15:20 -0000 > > > @@ -300,6 +300,10 @@ that are out of date for > > > <a > > > href="http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/stable_outdate.txt";>stable</a> > > > and > > > <a > > > href="http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/unstable_outdate.txt";>unstable</a>.</p> > > > > > > +<p>Björn Stenberg has written a > > > +<a href="http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/";>frontend</a> to help you find out > > > why > > > +packages are being held out of testing.</p> > > > + > > > <p>You might be interested in reading an older > > > <a > > > href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-0008/msg00906.html";>explanation > > > email</a>. Its only major flaw is that it doesn't take the package pool > > > > Front end is two words, but otherwise, I don't see why this should not > > be added. > > If we're going to quibble about that then it should be hyphenated, > namely "front-end".
That is the adjective form, though. The noun form should not be hyphenated. > To me, "front end" only makes sense if you're > comfortable talking about the ends of the object in question without the > "front" or "back" qualifier, as with for example a horse. When applied > to compilers, interfaces, and other such things then I think that > "front-end" has specific technical implications and should be > hyphenated. > > (Of course, the Jargon File and other similar dictionaries seem to use > the two forms interchangeably, but hey ... I just find the space > ungainly.) The Jargon File and similar so-called dictionaries are hardly sources of profoundness when it comes to the English language. I hope you'll remember that anything worth doing is worth doing right.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
