On 08/22/2010 12:42, M. Warner Losh wrote:
I think you're drawing the wrong conclusion here.
Doubtful. :)
My point is that we have trusted folks in the past to do the right
thing, even when they don't say they will.
And my point, which I will make one last time, is that this model hasn't
worked. Yes, it works sometimes, but we still have a bunch of stuff that
doesn't have _any_ man page at all. If we want to continue the
transition to being a more professional OS that isn't acceptable.
I've already made the points about why working through the documentation
_before_ committing is valuable, and that the simple step of requiring
this is an easy way to make sure the problem we have doesn't get any
worse. Clearly there isn't a lot of sympathy for either of these
perspectives in the wider community, so c'est la vie.
But I was serious about my other comment, if you(pl.) are not willing to
make a change to improve the situation, you lose the right to complain
down the road when the man pages don't magically appear.
towards Ann
Wrong name. :)
Doug
--
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
