Re: [Cooker] (drakconf-9.1-0.6mdk) dummy descriptions in MandrakeControl Center

2003-01-13 Thread Thierry Vignaud
Chuck Shirley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  AFAIK, the *drak* tools are under heavy reconstruction, and
  thats why those lines show up in every language...
 
 And yet this is okay for even a beta release?!  Difficult to
 believe, if you ask me.  Pre-Alpha perhaps, but certainly not ready
 for beta.  (IMHO)

we're reworked the mcc gui.
we now use 2 columns of icons + description.
there must have been a beginning so come the dummy description.
in cvs, half entries have description.
i'll upload a new mcc and people'll be able to provide description if
they want.

imho anyway, this has nothing to do with code quality or alpha/beta.





Re: [Cooker] (drakconf-9.1-0.6mdk) dummy descriptions in MandrakeControl Center

2003-01-10 Thread Chuck Shirley
On Thursday 09 January 2003 18:41, I wrote:
I've been noticing it for a while now, but I figured it would be
resolved eventually, though this makes about a month with the
problem.  Every module in the Contol Center lists the module's
name followed by the phrase dummy description  Is this a
temporary situation, or have my periodic updates provoked it at
some point along the way?  ((For example, under the System
section, the MenuDrake icon says Menus: dummy description in
the text box area next to it.

Am I the only one experiencing this malady?  It seems to me that
having the mcc describe every module as dummy description is a
pretty severe problem considering the (premature?!) move to a
beta-1 pre-release.  Should I be submitting it as an actual bug
rather than informally whining about it here in the List?

The involved package is drakconf-9.1-0.6mdk

-C.S.







Re: [Cooker] (drakconf-9.1-0.6mdk) dummy descriptions in MandrakeControl Center

2003-01-10 Thread Lea Gris
Chuck Shirley wrote:


Am I the only one experiencing this malady?  It seems to me that
having the mcc describe every module as dummy description is a
pretty severe problem considering the (premature?!) move to a
beta-1 pre-release.  Should I be submitting it as an actual bug
rather than informally whining about it here in the List?

The involved package is drakconf-9.1-0.6mdk

Noticed it as well with same guess as you;

For information I use french locales.


--
 Léa Gris - http://www.noiraude.net/
()   Campagne du ruban texte brut contre les courriels en HTML,
/\   contre les pièces jointes Microsoft.





Re: [Cooker] (drakconf-9.1-0.6mdk) dummy descriptions in MandrakeControl Center

2003-01-10 Thread Chuck Shirley
On Friday 10 January 2003 13:11, Thomas Backlund wrote:

AFAIK, the *drak* tools are under heavy reconstruction, and thats
why those lines show up in every language...

Thomas

And yet this is okay for even a beta release?!  Difficult to believe,
if you ask me.  Pre-Alpha perhaps, but certainly not ready for beta.
(IMHO)

Well, it's too bad that I'm not the only one with the situation, but
at least I know that I haven't lost my mind... :^)

-C.S.





Re: [Cooker] (drakconf-9.1-0.6mdk) dummy descriptions in MandrakeControl Center

2003-01-10 Thread Chuck Shirley
On Friday 10 January 2003 15:47, Thomas Backlund wrote:
Well, IMHO they needed to release the beta1 to get a basesystem 
to start the package voting from...

And I dont care if the name used is beta instead of alpha, since
it's just that, a name... I mean what's the difference in for examle:
1 x alpha + 4 x beta, or 5 x beta...

It's when the switch goes from 'beta' to 'RC' when things like
this shouldn't appear anymore...

IMHO 'beta' simply stands for work in progress, so in
the beginning of the process 'bugs' like this will appear...

and 'RC' stands for giving it the final touch / fixing 
the last bugs...

Thats the development process simplified ... (by me ;-) ... )

-- 
Thomas

You make very good points.  Good enough that I'm reconsidering
my concerns over the (very) rough state of the beta-1 release.
Still, Things need a lot of work.  I hope there is more emphasis
on releasing a quality product than on releasing a WIP on
schedule.

~C.S.