On Monday 23 April 2007 21:52, Christian Boltz wrote: > > Possible confusion with program sources > > openSUSE source tree uses "inst_source" as the distributed media > > Why do you see this as disadvantage? >
Because it can cause confusion. We need a term that applies to ALL types. > > Repository or Software Repository > > --------------------------------- > > > > > > Advantages > > ---------- > > > > Used in some non-SUSE tools > > Familiar to users from other distros > > Another advantage: > The build service offers *.repo files - and IIRC 10.3 will have a way to > add them in YaST with a single click. > That is a disadvantage. It leads to a strong association with only one type so some users may not understand all the others are also valid. > > Disadvantages > > ------------- > > [...] > > > Connection to one specific type (there are valid options that don't > > have repo directories) > > And there are valid repos that don't have an inst_source directory (for > example all build service projects). > Don't need an inst_source directory. That isn't relevant. > > Definitions don't seem very applicable to CD and DVD media > > Why do you think so? It just doesn't sound right to me and others have expressed similar concerns. > > I'm not sure if the /is/ a definition of "repository" at all... > Wikipedia lists several different definitions on > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repository > One of them is a one-fits-all definition: "a place where data is stored" > [1] Wikipedia is not a reliable source but I did consider what AJ pasted from it. > > > Hmm, I wonder if we really need to decide for one or the other. > IMHO both terms make sence in different cases. I would vote for > using "installation source" for the "official" media (CD, DVD, FTP) > and "repository" for the build service or other external packagers > (suser-*, packman, ...). Not an option. We need one term that works for all of them. Anything else would be a nightmare. It would create an artificial distinction between types that really isn't necessary. > > Another question: do you have any feedback from translators what they > prefer and/or what is easier to translate? Or: what doesn't need > translation - for example "Repository" is also used in german (and > everybody who would translate it to "Behälter" or "Aufbewahrungsort" > would not be understood ;-) > "installation source" translates to "Installationsquelle". Not a > problem, but a different word. Not in that respect. I have had some discussions with translation coordinators about what causes problems and when tips are needed for translators. I also see the bug reports sometimes but that is no guarantee that I see all of them. You have to expect a high chance of repository being translated to something that would not be understood properly. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
