At 1150567172 past the epoch, SZERVÁC Attila wrote:
> ++ Contrib/Applications
> ++ Contrib/Games
> ...
> ++ Non-free/Applications
> ++ Non-free/Games
I think that could be confusing when packages migrate between
main,contrib,non-free. I don't know how often that happens.
> -- Text
> ++
My ideas:
++ Contrib/Applications
++ Contrib/Games
...
++ Non-free/Applications
++ Non-free/Games
...
-- Text
++ Text Tools/Utilities/Accessories...
sas-guest (Hungarian Translator)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contac
Hello Debian people,
I am proposing a new version of the new Debian menu structure proposal
incorporating changes that have been proposed.
Here the change from the previous draft:
- change 'HAM Radio' to 'Amateur Radio'.
- revert change 'Educational' -> 'Education'.
- add 'Electronics' in place
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 09:57 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Amateur radio is the dumb name, for people who are confused by
> what the practioners call it -- HAM radio.
Perhaps, as others have suggested, this is a locale specific issue. In
the US, you won't find "ham" in the FCC rules [1
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:13:53AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> At 1145044383 past the epoch, Linas ??virblis wrote:
> > Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >
> > > Amateur radio is the dumb name, for people who
> > > are confused by what the practioners call it --
> > > HAM radio.
>
At 1145044383 past the epoch, Linas Žvirblis wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> > Amateur radio is the dumb name, for people who
> > are confused by what the practioners call it --
> > HAM radio.
>
> It is translated as "amateur radio" to some languages.
> Others transla
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 10:25:14AM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> The pkg-games project has discussed in the past that "Arcade" is a poor
> category, and yet it is preserved in this new menu proposal.
>
> The thread starts here:
>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-games-devel/2006-Jan
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 02:51:31PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
>
> Outdated...? The term "Ham Radio" seems a _lot_ more common than
> "Amateur Radio" -- for instance, Ham Radio seems to be heard quite often
> on the news (usually in connection with disasters), whereas, to be
> honest I can't say I'
On 4/17/06, Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Actually, the word Ham is nowadays being used as the opposite of Spam,
> > "good, wanted" E-mail.
>
> This seems rather a stretch -- it's sometimes used to mean this when
> discussing spam-detection algo
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, the word Ham is nowadays being used as the opposite of Spam,
> "good, wanted" E-mail.
This seems rather a stretch -- it's sometimes used to mean this when
discussing spam-detection algorithms, but it's hardly something people
commonly use otherwis
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> To the practitioners, it is HAM radio. Not Amatuer radio --
> and the only reason we are considering not calling it ham since
> ignorant users should not be confused. Sounds like dumbing down to
> me.
>
> manoj
>
>
Eh? I use amateur radio all the t
> "Amateur Radio", as fuzzy as it may be, is at least literally
> translatable, and HAM is not. Please realize that English menu is not
> targeted at English speaking world only. It is also a default for
> situations where translation is not available.
Rebounding on that mail, but actually more
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 09:57:14AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2006, Linas ??virblis stated:
>
> > Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >
> Is there a problem with using "Amateur (Ham) Radio"?
> >>> It is unnecessarily complicated.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> Since when has dumbing down debian
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 14:29:45 +0100, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On 14 Apr 2006, Thiemo Seufer told this:
>>
>> > Ognyan Kulev wrote:
>> >> Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> >>> "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
>> >>>
>> >>> Even bet
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Amateur radio is the dumb name, for people who are confused by
> what the practioners call it -- HAM radio.
It is translated as "amateur radio" to some languages. Others translate
it entirely to something specific to that language. And some use HAM.
Can you cla
On 14 Apr 2006, Linas Žvirblis stated:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
Is there a problem with using "Amateur (Ham) Radio"?
>>> It is unnecessarily complicated.
>
> [...]
>
>> Since when has dumbing down debian been a goal?
>
> It is not about "dumbing down Debian". It is about not having dumb
>
On 14 Apr 2006, Thiemo Seufer outgrape:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On 14 Apr 2006, Thiemo Seufer told this:
>>
>>> Ognyan Kulev wrote:
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more
> appropriate.
>
> Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateu
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Not only too long but completely wrong.
Yeah, I seem to be confusing things. Sorry for that.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 04:43:32PM +0300, Linas ??virblis wrote:
> First of all, "Ham" is not a word, neither it is an acronym. It roughly
> stands for "[H]andheld [a][m]ateur". So what does that make? "Amateur
> (handheld amateur) radio". Makes no sense, does it?
What?!
> The correct term would
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 10:40:03AM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 14:29 +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > What exactly was dumbed down here? Is there a non-Ham Amateur Radio
> > we would have to distinguish from?
>
> DX, perhaps? It seems to this outsider that both Ham and DX a
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 11:49:31AM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> > Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
> > >
> > > Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateur Radio", but some may
> > > disagree. I've CC'd debian-ham
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>> Is there a problem with using "Amateur (Ham) Radio"?
>> It is unnecessarily complicated.
[...]
> Since when has dumbing down debian been a goal?
It is not about "dumbing down Debian". It is about not having dumb names
for menu sections.
First of all, "Ham" is not a
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 14:29 +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Yes. Debian shouldn't be the Linux Distribution of Cryptic Acronyms.
Perhaps you missed the point earlier in the thread that Ham isn't an
acronym? Also, I don't think anyone with even a passing familiarity
with amateur radio seriously thin
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2006, Thiemo Seufer told this:
>
> > Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> >> Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> >>> "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
> >>>
> >>> Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateur Radio", but some may
> >>> disagree. I've CC'd d
On 14 Apr 2006, Thiemo Seufer told this:
> Ognyan Kulev wrote:
>> Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>>> "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
>>>
>>> Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateur Radio", but some may
>>> disagree. I've CC'd debian-hams for their input also.
>>
>> I
Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
> >
> > Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateur Radio", but some may
> > disagree. I've CC'd debian-hams for their input also.
>
> Is there a problem with using "Amateur (Ham) R
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
>
> Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateur Radio", but some may
> disagree. I've CC'd debian-hams for their input also.
Is there a problem with using "Amateur (Ham) Radio"?
Regards,
ogi
--
To UNSU
Greetings..
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 07:36 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
> >
> > Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateur Radio", but some may
> > disagree. I've CC'd debian-hams for
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 01:56:50AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Bill Allombert [Tue, Apr 11 2006, 12:34:45AM]:
>
> Yep. WRT you said above, what abot renaming "WindowManagers/Modules" to
> "$wm Modules" (one level above WM starters and indicating which
> "modules" are meant by that).
Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Yep. WRT you said above, what abot renaming "WindowManagers/Modules" to
> "$wm Modules" (one level above WM starters and indicating which
> "modules" are meant by that).
One more thing to consider is that if we will have to to move/rename
modules in the future (current situa
#include
* Bill Allombert [Tue, Apr 11 2006, 12:34:45AM]:
> Please take into account that Debian menu will only display modules
> suitable for the running window-manager (because they use a specific
Okay... now I understand.
> 'needs' field that only this wm 'support'). So in effect you are jus
#include
* Bill Allombert [Mon, Apr 10 2006, 11:57:48PM]:
> I would like to stress that modules menu entries use window-managers
> specific 'needs' fields and as such are not bound by the Debian menu
> sub-policy (each window manager can choose its own section for modules)
> so it is meant only a
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 12:22:53AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Bill Allombert [Mon, Apr 10 2006, 11:57:48PM]:
>
> > I would like to stress that modules menu entries use window-managers
> > specific 'needs' fields and as such are not bound by the Debian menu
> > sub-policy (each wind
I would expect that anybody who knows what Ham radio is would recognize
Amateur Radio as referring to the same thing.
Jon Dowland wrote:
At 1144568179 past the epoch, Christian Perrier wrote:
HAM is probably well known among the amateur radio
community.
However, *outside* this community, t
At 1144653527 past the epoch, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 10-Apr-06, 04:17 (CDT), Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > I agree that "Ham Radio" is not too descriptive for
> > those outside the circle (myself included). However it
> > is consistent with the terminology in the Linux kernel's
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 07:18:47AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 10-Apr-06, 04:17 (CDT), Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree that "Ham Radio" is not too descriptive for those
> > outside the circle (myself included). However it is
> > consistent with the terminology in the Linu
On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 07:18 -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 10-Apr-06, 04:17 (CDT), Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree that "Ham Radio" is not too descriptive for those
> > outside the circle (myself included). However it is
> > consistent with the terminology in the Linux kerne
On 10-Apr-06, 04:17 (CDT), Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree that "Ham Radio" is not too descriptive for those
> outside the circle (myself included). However it is
> consistent with the terminology in the Linux kernel's
> config.
And how many of our users are going to be digging t
At 1144568179 past the epoch, Christian Perrier wrote:
> HAM is probably well known among the amateur radio
> community.
>
> However, *outside* this community, the name is pretty
> cryptic (I have not idea, actually, what this "H" letter
> stands for).
>
> So, I would also second "Amateur radio".
Radio amateur also doesn't go well in en_AU. Amateur radio's better.
andrew
On 4/10/06, Benjamin Seidenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 09:48:48AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 04:46:10PM +0200, Bill Allombert w
Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 09:48:48AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 04:46:10PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
>>
>>> Package: debian-policy
>>> Version: 3.6.2.2
>>> Severity: wishlist
>>>
>>> Background:
>>> --
>>> The menu structure
> "HAM" is not an acronym, so "Ham Radio" would be more appropriate.
>
> Even better (IMHO) is the full term "Amateur Radio", but some may
> disagree. I've CC'd debian-hams for their input also.
HAM is probably well known among the amateur radio community.
However, *outside* this community, th
On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 09:48:48AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 04:46:10PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Package: debian-policy
> > Version: 3.6.2.2
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > Background:
> > --
> > The menu structure define the list of sections and subsect
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 04:46:10PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.6.2.2
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Background:
> --
> The menu structure define the list of sections and subsections of
> the Debian menu system (which are displayed in window-managers menus).
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.2.2
Severity: wishlist
Background:
--
The menu structure define the list of sections and subsections of
the Debian menu system (which are displayed in window-managers menus).
The official list is part of the Debian menu subpolicy. This list is a
bit out
45 matches
Mail list logo
