[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Persistent overlay?



On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 19:15 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > 
> > I'm not sure whether changing this midstream is a great idea.  After
> > all, the "persistence" and "persistent overlay" were terms I described
> > repeatedly and consistently with every one of the dozen or more
> > interviews I gave for Fedora 9. 
> 
> I noticed and it I am still not sure it is the right choice. Many people 
> didn't even get the idea on what was different from previous releases of 
> Fedora or other distributions on this particular USB feature. I am still 
> of the opinion "persistent overlay" is just not the right terminology 
> for end users.

I can only tell you that I was *very* clear in the interviews what made
this different, both from the "persistence" perspective and the
"non-destructive" perspective.  That journalists may still have got it
wrong doesn't seem like a problem that renaming is going to solve.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]