Defining the workgroup objectives

[Johannes Zarl]

On Tuesday 09 August 2005 16:29, Sven Mueller wrote:
> >>Me too. Or some equivalent which can use _names_ instead of numbers for
> >>the runlevel. Of course those names could simply be "1" "2" etc. by
> >> default.
> >
> > let's not call it runlevels. Let's call it profiles. /me ducks.
>
> <grin> Profiles (even hardware-dependent-profiles) are no invention of
> that Redmond company. And in a way, I would say that calling it profiles
> would be a lot closer to reality than calling them "runlevels" which is
> an extremely abstract name IMHO.

Please don't! Calling runlevels "Profiles" is like calling them "states" -- 
it's not wrong, but it could mean a lot of other things, too.

"That's the wrong profile, you are using." may be an appropriate thing to say 
just after startup when someone wonders why his X server is not coming up, 
but it may not always be that clear (just think of some browser implementing 
an offline and an online profile, on a system with an offline and an online 
"profile"). If you really want to stay with "profiles", call them "system 
profile" or anything more specific.

Cheers,
  Johannes
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/initscripts-ng-devel/attachments/20050809/c530569e/attachment-0001.pgp