On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 17:12 +0800, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 11:07 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > > On 02/07/2011 10:51 AM, Olivier Keun wrote: > > > > > > What are your thoughts about this? I'm hoping to get an official reaction > > > from our dev-team, so we can avoid some of the confusion that is present > > > now. > > > > > > > there is nothing wrong with this distro and others distros that have > > arch as a base. > > > > Is good that the users are interested in this spins and that are > > discussions about them on our forum. > > Would this mean modifications need to be made on our forum policy (as > cited by Olivier?). > > Personally I see ArchBang as similar enough to Arch that most > help/problem-solving is probably pretty identical. Its not the same as > Chakra was, after all. But clear policy helps. > > I think you missed the point here, as archlinux users TU/Dev's we don't know what archbang does behind the "scenes" so because it still uses archlinux packages you can say we can help these guys on our forums. But because they do some special stuff we actually can't. So i would rather point out that the get redirected to archbang and get help there. -- Jelle van der Waa
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
