On 2006/02/19 12:23, Mark E. Perkins wrote:
> On 2006/02/19 06:20, Mark E. Perkins wrote:
> 
>>On 2006/02/19 06:02, Roland Illig wrote:
>>
>>
>>>This looks really cute. Maybe we should make this layout the default.
>>>And if someone doesn't like this style (or should I say theme), {s,}he
>>>can configure it to something else.
>>>
>>>.oO(pkgsrc themes)
>>
>>
>>Cuteness was not a consideration. ;) Reducing visual clutter with a bit of white
>>space and, thereby, improving readability was.
>>
>>Whether the choice of leader is a pkgsrc configuration option is something
>>probably not worth much effort, IMO.
>>
> 
> 
> Thinking a little more about your response (and sarcasm duly noted), I
> think you may have missed the real point I was trying to make. Text
> related to higher-level actions (phases in this case) should be indented
> *more* than text related to subsidiary actions (steps). Hence, if the
> leaders are distinct, they should be reversed from current practice;
> bigger "steps" (phases) should have shorter leaders, smaller "steps"
> (steps) should have longer leaders.
> 
> But you didn't respond to that part of my comment, so I have no idea
> whether that point was noted.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark

sigh... I need more sleep or more caffeine

s/more/less/