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
-- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
