On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Al Banks wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked a zillion times, but the first inconsistency I see is the name - Should it be KOHA, Koha, koha, etc?
My vote would be Koha, but I'll go along with the group here...
I agree. I'm trying to confine myself to Koha, although the occasion braino still occurs. -pate
Thanks! -Al
On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 13:06, Pat Eyler wrote:
Paul is rapidly closing in on a 2.0 release, but there are a lot of cosmetic issues that we really *need* to get fixed. These are mostly typos, mispellings, mistranslations, and the like in the text of pages, and in URLs. I don't think it matters much whether we use US or UK spelling on the pages, but we should be consistent. Since Koha is from New Zealand, I propose that we stick to UK english. (Let's just try to avoid 'Ye Olde OPACKe' though, okay?)
It would also be great if we could mark deprecated functions as such, and flag non-working/buggy sections as well.
If people could please register pages they've adopted at: http://www.saas.nsw.edu.au/wiki/index.php?page=KohaBugHunting It will go a long way toward reducing duplication of effort.
I recognize that 1.9.X is a development series and doesn't need to be perfect, but finding and closing out bugs here will help make the road to 2.0.0 that much smoother.
thanks, -pate
Pat Eyler Kaitiaki/manager migrant Linux sys admin the Koha project ruby, shell, and perl geek http://www.koha.org http://pate.eylerfamily.org
_______________________________________________ Koha mailing list Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha -- Al Banks <abanks@buscominc.com>