Hello Christian, On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 09:35:34AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > -msgid "Detailed configuration needed for each user" > > +msgid "Detailed configuration needed for each machine" > > No, sorry, this is really about *user* configuration. The maintainer > scripts create a general config file for a given machine, but users > can tweak it in their personal preferences file.
Well, but this is inconsistent, because the next paragraph does not
mention user *at all*:
"The performance of MPlayer depends heavily on hardware; this means that it "
"may benefit from tweaking options for every single machine it's installed on."
Looking at this text, the configuration is machine dependent (which
makes sense, considering different graphics and CPU capabilities, not
to mention different sub-architectures) but I see much less
indications that users should need to tweak the configuration (albeit
they can, as explained later) because most of the time they will run
with exact the same basic system (hardware, (X|graphics) configuration
...). They simply might have different acceptance levels (e.g. prefer
double sized video even if this means frame drops, ...).
But independent of this discussion the text should be consistent if
you reject my change then the next paragraph should read similar to
the following (ideally a new paragaph should be added):
"The performance of MPlayer depends heavily on hardware; this means that it "
"may benefit from tweaking options for every single machine it's installed on."
"Furthermore many options can be tweaked dependent on user preference "
"(e.g. XXX)."
Please replace XXX with examples of those functionality you (or the
maintainer) have in mind, e.g. quality standards (frame drop vs.
display size again comes to my mind).
Maybe even say "are often tweaked" or "are usually tweaked" or
similar, to stress that this is a important feature (actually I never
tweaked the options in a config file, only in case of problems or
individual desires (e.g. fullscreen) via command line, so I really
don't know good examples here). Otherwise this information is IMHO not that
important to show, as at least non-GNOME programms typically have a
large configuration file I can (and sometimes must) tweak, either
directly or through a GUI. And a video player is not that different
from that (but, as stated, I've not felt the desire too yet). For
machine, this is different, as it means that the admin should provide
a sensible default (as opposite to user) for the entire machine.
> > -"choose that option (the 'xvinfo' command may help)."
> > +"choose that option (the 'xvinfo'(1) command may help)."
>
>
> Sorry, again. During the English reviews, we *don't* promote this,
> imho bad, habit of referring to command along with their man page
> section number. This is geek jargon, which our users don't need. We do
> not remove such references systematically (though this could happen as
> I find this really entirely useless), but we certainly do not add new
> ones.
No problem. This is of course a matter of taste, and the additional
information gained is indeed often very limited, as usually only one
man page section is present and new users might be confused about the
number.
Greetings
Helge
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
