Hi Todd, > What's the difference in the install instructions? You run rpm, > import the keys to your gpg keyring, and optionally enable the yum > service. Choosing yum1 without rpm upgrade or yum2 with rpm upgrade would be the only difference, right. > That's going to be an awful lot of text. There's a point at which the > extra documentation that's there to help the completely clueless will > bog down those who are just trying to get up and running fast. I > don't know exactly where that point is, but it's something to keep in > mind. A quick start page and a more in depth instruction page might be > quite useful once everything is all documented. That would keep as > many people happy as possible. Here's my proposal: http://jonaspasche.de/fedoralegacy/quickstart.html Basically it's a summary of the detailed instructions, leaving out anything an experienced user might regard as boring. What do you think about it? > > We can't even get the apt package QA tested, so there is little hope > > at this stage we can get a custom installer written, tested, and > > documented. I have the strong feeling that writing a custom installer is _really_ oversized. My patience with unexperienced people is very big, but I don't think that people that don't know how to manually browser through a repository and select a directory based on their operating system release will be interested in Fedora Legacy at all. :) > Yep. I'm surprised that apt hasn't gotten more attention. Me too. > And since I have > no interest in using apt, it's time that feels more like work. :) Hehe, I can understand this very well. However it's work that needs to done and shouldn't be too hard to do. We're all awaiting the apt release, but someone has to verify it. Please. Please! Jonas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
