Oops, re aptitude : was [Re: Edgy in the news]
eric.dunbar at gmail.com
Mon Oct 30 11:13:32 GMT 2006
On 30/10/06, Matthew East <mdke at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> * 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.
Ahhh :-(. 'nother point. At the bottom of said page is:
"(c) 2005 Canonical Ltd. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu and Canonical are
registered trademarks of Canonical Ltd."
I generally draw a distinction between a "user generated" page and a
page on the "official" web site for a distro.
More information about the sounder