Good point. Will omit that second line.
Thanks Margot James Carlson wrote: > [I know you're looking for a vote here and not more discussion, but I > don't think the text matches up yet.] > > Margot Miller writes: > >> There is quite a bit of FOSS out there with no interface stability >> in the external Sun documentation. This is not a problem for Sun >> project teams as they can always look at the interface tables in >> the ARC tables to determine stability level. >> > > It's a problem for Sun project teams as well. "Public" stability > levels require that the interface and its stability are properly > documented. That reference documentation is part of the definition of > "Public." > > The ARC materials help us review things to make sure that all is as > expected, but I think the idea that we might _force_ project teams to > dumpster dive through /shared/sac for basic interface documentation > due to inadequacies in the delivered material is wrong on several > counts. > > As with many things, this is not a peculiar problem with FOSS. It's a > problem with differing kinds of documentation, regardless of who is > the author and whether or not that author is a Sun employee. > > Jim "getting tired of FOSS claiming itself to be special" Carlson ;-} > >
