[arch-releng] RC1 ISOs and final release

[Aaron Griffin]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:15 PM, cinan6 at gmail.com <cinan6 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02/10/2009 08:45 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 08:28:28PM +0100, cinan6 at gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 02/10/2009 05:54 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 06:42:48PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:19:29AM -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Gerhard Brauer<gerbra at archlinux.de>
>>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i have a proposition on the current RC1 and the final release phase:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the current state of the documentation is the real problem not to
>>>>>>> release the ISO - hell, let's remove ALL documentation from THIS
>>>>>>> release. We have not an official ISO release since 2008.06 and now
>>>>>>> someone found a "yaourt" in the docu!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMHO: the RC1 is in release state from technical state. Let's build
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> final without docu (i guess not many people will ever need them
>>>>>>> really)
>>>>>>> and fix the last minor things (typo in /etc/issue, etc.).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         *** And release it.  **
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we switch to aif next release the docu must rewritten again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good point, and I agree 100%. I will make sure we add a note to the
>>>>>> release notes that documentation has been removed because it is
>>>>>> severely outdated. I will point them to the wiki page, updated with
>>>>>> dolby's changes, and suggest saving or printing or something if they
>>>>>> need offline docs - does this sound good?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though, if I grabbed dolby's changes right now, and removed the
>>>>>> beginners guide, will that put us in a better state?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> With or without docs, i dont know whats best. But since the version of
>>>>> the guide im working on is mostly the same but shorter at this point,
>>>>> if its decided to include docs, just include the ones available in the
>>>>> installer.git now, with a note that its outdated.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Or what Aaron  said . The new guide is updated in some parts. Maybe it
>>>> would be better to include that one. I dont really know. Just if you do
>>>> make sure to get it from the git repo i posted in BR #13140.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> I think you could include just one part - how to set up network.
>>> Everything else is on wiki, so users can look there. I suppose Arch
>>> users aren't total beginners and they know how to use elinks.
>>>
>>
>> You mean besides the setup network part during FTP/HTTP installation and
>> rc.conf ?
>>
>
> Yop. Just this part: 3. Select Source-->3.2 FTP/HTTP -->3.2.1 Setup Network
> (and 3.2.2 Choose Mirror).
>>
>> Heres how the guide looks now.
>>
>> http://github.com/grbzks/install-guide/raw/074d47eaed7ddb1449476c0d12675548648a985a/arch-linux-official-guide.txt
>> Suggestions welcome.
>>
>>
>
> My idea: _First_, set up network. _Then_ print something like that: "For
> help see ...(page on internet)" and continue in installation.
> What is so difficult during installation? There's nice ncurses interface.
> User just chooses options and he doesn't need to type anything if he wants
> (of course it depends on computer etc...). And everything could be set up
> after installation.
> The question is: who uses this distro? If advanced users (= not beginners)
> then short form guide OK.

I agree. Even on my first Arch install I didn't use any sort of
documentation. I always wondered what sort of people used this install
guide.