Andrew Benton wrote: > On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:15:51 +1100 > Wayne Blaszczyk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 04/12/11 15:30, Ken Moffat wrote: >>> Impressive! Looks as if I might be putting pulse into this build, >>> now that I've got something to work from. What's stopping you >>> putting all this into the book ? >> It's incomplete. Most of it, were you see the ??, need to have their >> dependencies reviewed, and there is a lot of placeholders for the >> description text with the new packages. I've found it a battle to keep >> up with the minor revisions. I don't think I have the time to do all >> this. I could just dump all the stuff as is, and let other people update >> the individual pages as required? Let me know if there is any objections >> to this approach. > > +1 For putting these Gnome 3 pages into the book. I think if we wait > until someone has prepared perfect pages for the whole of Gnome 3 > before we add it to the book then it will never happen. Put some sort > of note at the top of all the pages that need improving/finishing and > then we can update a page at a time and inch towards getting it done. > Something like: > > <note> > <para>This page is a work in progress and all the details have not > been checked.</para> > </note> > > Then as we work through we can remove the note from pages that have > been checked. One page at a time.
I don't have a problem with adding Gnome 3, but would like it in a completely separate section. We would not want to mix Gnome2 and Gnome3 packages. I agree with Andy that the pages should be marked. It's easy enough to define an entity in general.ent and just place it in each page like we do &lfs70_checked; At some point when Gnome3 is stable and everyone agrees, we could then just drop Gnome2 from the book. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
