On Wed, Aug 28, 2002, Michael Schloh von Bennewitz wrote:
> > 1.0 already did this, now we can talk about past, I think
> > [...]
> > -of software deployment is taking form.
> > +of software deployment took form.
>
> Then consider the followinig altered paragraph:
>
> A flexible and powerful software packaging facility, OpenPKG eased the
> cross-platform installation and administration of Unix software.
> As it consolidated different vendor approaches into a unified architecture,
> it served system administrators of large networks previously burdened
> by non-conformant systems. OpenPKG leveraged proven technologies like
> Red Hat Package Manager (RPM) and provided an additional system layer
> on top of the operating system. With OpenPKG, a new and unique method
> of software deployment took form.
>
> Sounds schwulisch? Of course, because it's written in past tense. If you want
> to break the consistency of the paragraph, then finish it off with the past
> tense. Otherwise, I recommend that we back the change out.
Hmmm.. I don't want to break anything, but without past tense it IMHO
reads like we now start with this unique method, but OpenPKG already was
unique and now got even better. So what to do now?
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org
Developer Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
