Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Target classifications v2 ?
Re: Target classifications v2 ?
From: Johannes Linke <johannes.linke_at_gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:41:08 +0200
Thomas Martitz wrote:
> I'm not convinced we need 4. 3) and 4) sound like they could be 1
> category (I don't even think targets that would be under your 4) need
> to be mentioned at all as classified target). And then we're at the
> same classification we have now.
> We might consider renaming the current unstable to usable though.
I'm not a developer, but I agree. I think these classifications are only
for users. And the average user doesn't care whether a port is unusable
for everyday or unusable at all. And changing unstable to usable sounds
good. Also with 4 classifications the main page would become a mess.
Received on 2009-10-12