[Mageia-dev] Changing default media names

Mon Nov 21 01:00:35 CET 2011

On Mon, 21 Nov 2011, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
+
+> Op zondag 20 november 2011 23:48:26 schreef nicolas vigier:
+> > On Sun, 20 Nov 2011, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
+> [..]
+> > > I disagree with you here, I'm all for consistent media names that are
+> > > easy to complete, but "Core Release Source" is more userfriendly than
+> > > "SRPMS/core/release" . i'm pretty sure my dad would get even more lost
+> > > than he is right now.
+> > 
+> > For someone who doesn't know anything about our media policy, both names
+> > are equaly meaningless. If we want them to understand something, what is
+> > needed is a description text of the medias.
+> 
+> no need to assume & judge me, i know pretty well that the name i supplied is 
+> not a name we have.
+
+I'm not judging anyone. Just saying that "Core Release Source" is as
+meaningless as "SRPMS/core/release" for someone who doesn't know media
+policy.
+
+> 
+> > > imho "Cauldron Core Release (source)" is more userfriendly than
+> > > "cauldron/SRPM/core/release". at least to people who don't even know what
+> > > a path is.
+> > > 
+> > > it's acceptable for me to:
+> > >  - no caps
+> > >  - better ordering
+> > >  - consistent arch adding
+> > > 
+> > > but using pathnames, albeit the best consistency, is not good.
+> > 
+> > Why ?
+> 
+> it's imho and because of the reason and example above.
+> 
+> > > imho we should be able in cli to use a unique identifier, but it doesn't
+> > > have to be the name as seen.
+> > > 
+> > > if we can use urpm* commands with the path name as identifier, that's ok
+> > > for me too.
+> > 
+> > Having multiple unique identifiers for each media is not what I would
+> > call user-friendly. We already have the name as unique identifier, there
+> > is no need to add an other one.
+> 
+> noone said anything about "multitple unique identifiers". be that as it may, 
+> from a user pov: if we have name + unique_id and GUI shows name, or we have 
+> name + description and GUI shows description is more or less the same if 1st 
+> name is similar to 2nd description.
+> 
+> in short, if rpmdrake shows a short description instead of where name is now 
+> and name is mentioned of lesser importance, i'm ok with this.
+> 
+> that would indeed make urpmi commands use path and rpmdrake still show 
+> (descriptive name/description)
+> 
+> if that's what you mean, maybe you should've been more clear on this. then i'm 
+> sure even Stormi agrees...
+
+I don't understand what you're talking about ...
+
+