Re: [Tails-dev] Please review and merge doc/wheezy

intrigeri wrote:
> Technically (as you very well know :), we're shipping GNOME 3, but
> running it in Fallback mode. Do you think it's worth mentioning?
> Granted, it would be more important to mention on the About page than
> on this one
> (doc/first_steps/introduction_to_gnome_and_the_tails_desktop), but I'm
> wondering how wrong it is to make Tails users think that *this* is how
> GNOME 3 is supposed to look like.

Done in 3d7f1cc.

>> The <span class="guisubmenu">System Tools</span> submenu allows you to customize
>> the GNOME desktop or the system.
>
> How about making it clear that such customization won't survive
> a reboot? (No, that's not a regression brought by this branch, just
> mentioning it in passing, as I wonder how much this sentence accounts
> for the numerous reports we have of "my customizition are forgotten".)

Done in ef79ca6.

> Regarding commit 98dafca, I wonder if maybe two different note divs
> would be better, since the two notes added there are actually
> orthogonal. BTW, I would put the second one first, as it seems more
> important to me, and maybe use a warning styling (assuming we have
> one) rather than a note.

Done in c7f341d.

> Regarding commit 0d2cb74 ("Remove big bullet points"), I'm curious
> why. I only have heard good things about this clear indication that
> one is making progress through a step-by-step process. OTOH, given
> bc5b8e9, I get why we don't want two different numberings.

The idea here was to keep using them on very special pages like the
Download page but to not use them regularly on instructions steps. They
take up quite a bit of vertical space and require headings. Having more
compact instructions is also a way of making them clearer.

But now that you forced me to have a second thought about it, I realized
that having numbers for the h2 headings, which correspond to a sequence
here as well (on the contrary to h1 headings), might be a good thing.
Then we could speak of step 1.3 for example.

So what do you think of b4b048e?

> To end with, the instructions to install seahorse-nautilus on Debian
> (doc/get/verify_the_iso_image_using_gnome) are wrong: unless specified
> explicitly, apt-get won't automatically fetch the package
> from backports.

I don't feel like giving the full instructions on using backports in
that page. So I did commit a689e82 to point to them. If that doesn't
satisfy you, please be more explicit on how this should be documented.

Ready for merge again, assigning back the review to you.

--
sajolida