Oops, re aptitude : was [Re: Edgy in the news]

[Matthew East]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



* Eric Dunbar:
> On 29/10/06, Peter Garrett <peter.garrett at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>  https://help.ubuntu.com/community/EdgyUpgrades
>> Actually I missed the fact that the page *does* mention aptitude.
> 
> And, on that page there's this very telling comment by Canonical
> regarding apt-get:
> 
> "Upgrading Ubuntu using apt-get
> 
> Please note - this method is much less reliable. Using Update Manager
> (see above) is likely to be much less problematic. "

"by Canonical"?

We obviously have a problem with this - everyone on this thread has
referred to that page as being "official" Ubuntu documentation.

In fact, as you can see by the "Community" tab, it's simply
documentation written by the community, and is not either "official" or
"by Canonical".

It looks like we need to work on how we communicate the reliability of
these wiki pages (so cc:ing to the documentation team mailing list).

Note that the warning you cite wasn't then until yesterday, when I added it.

Matt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFRbQGtSaF0w5rBv8RAsYEAJ0SD1pKP/O81ptIO/YZtKlWVdEHDQCfWgN6
tVs3DbeEanCz+VhAetgTFdI=
=JKLC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----