Bug#388879: closed by Mattia Dongili <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Bug#388879: fixed in cpufreqd 2.2.0-1)
> > I suggest also double-checking that the *priority* is > > double doh! will do. > > > adapted. Displaying errors at priority low or medium makes them very > > likely to *not* be displayed so you might really consider whether the > > priority is adaptedor if the note itself is really useful, of > > course...:-) > > > > If these error notes are really something that your users should see > > when the error occurs, setting their priority to "high" is probably > > better. > > Well, I don't think the message itself is all that useful, that is why > it was a note of low priority. What I'm concerned about is all the > wasted translation effort if the notes are completely removed... > > I'm seriously thinking about completely removing them now... Actually, I read some writings by Joey Hess stating that error templates are displayed *whatever* the debconf priority settings could be..:-) So, indeed, what I previously mentioned might be wrong. About wasted translation effort, well, there will be some...but just think about the effort you would save, avoiding future translators to work on the template..:) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#388879: closed by Mattia Dongili <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Bug#388879: fixed in cpufreqd 2.2.0-1)
On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 08:03:32AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > > >* set debconf priority to "error" as we're only displaying errors. > > (Closes: #388879) > > s/priority/type doh. :) > I suggest also double-checking that the *priority* is double doh! will do. > adapted. Displaying errors at priority low or medium makes them very > likely to *not* be displayed so you might really consider whether the > priority is adaptedor if the note itself is really useful, of > course...:-) > > If these error notes are really something that your users should see > when the error occurs, setting their priority to "high" is probably > better. Well, I don't think the message itself is all that useful, that is why it was a note of low priority. What I'm concerned about is all the wasted translation effort if the notes are completely removed... I'm seriously thinking about completely removing them now... -- mattia :wq! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#388879: closed by Mattia Dongili <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Bug#388879: fixed in cpufreqd 2.2.0-1)
>* set debconf priority to "error" as we're only displaying errors. > (Closes: #388879) s/priority/type I suggest also double-checking that the *priority* is adapted. Displaying errors at priority low or medium makes them very likely to *not* be displayed so you might really consider whether the priority is adaptedor if the note itself is really useful, of course...:-) If these error notes are really something that your users should see when the error occurs, setting their priority to "high" is probably better. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
