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 @@ -300,6 +300,10 @@ that are out of date for 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". 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.) Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
