Hi, "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Sat, Jan 29, 2005:
> What I'm saying is that -- in the same way that some people insist on > Debian Policy to be followed blindly -- there are already some people > insisting that this document be followed blindly. "Raising" the status > of it to something more "official" would make things only worse. It's a vicious circle: the actual document can't be the official reference in its current state, so you don't want a package / debian.org web page / BTS entry for the document, so the documentation can't be corrected easily etc. (Sorry if I misunderstood some parts of the discussion). I feel documentation lacks in this domain, and this documentation is better than nothing. I agree it might be wrong on some points (or so I was told), and I propose that this guide should start with a warning that is is currently worked on, and did not reach an official state yet (something like "BETA" in red in the name should do). Would this documentation with a warning it's still beta be acceptable to enter the archive and be linked to in the devel/ section? This might allow others to contribute to the doc constructively by submitting patches, or filing bugs on the various topics that might be discussed. Bye, -- Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
