Author: sajolida Date: To: The Tails public development discussion list Subject: Re: [Tails-dev] Please review and merge doc/wheezy
intrigeri wrote: > Hi,
>
> sajolida@??? wrote (13 Jul 2014 12:41:29 GMT) :
>> 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.
>
> (History rewritten, commit ids changed... anyway :)
>
> Good. I've fixed the HTML in 565d03b.
>
>>>> 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.
>
> I can find this commit neither with that ID, nor on doc/wheezy.
>
>>> 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.
>
> Same, cannot find it.
>
>>> 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?
>
> Cannot find it.
>
>>> 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.
>
> Good.
>
>> Ready for merge again, assigning back the review to you.
>
> Merged what I could see, reassigned back to you.
I got them misplaced. Now it's ec4c8a5, 1d69e6b, and b5457b3. Sorry.
