Re: documentation patches

[Tom M. <tme...@vl...>]

Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Tom Metro wrote:
>>Would you mind if we came up with a new name for this file in the
>>documentation?
> 
> Tom, with all due respect, I think it is time someone put their money
> where their mouth is. If you want to discuss documentation changes, do
> so with a patch against CVS.

I find it more respectful to discuss before patching, rather than 
patching first and asking for forgiveness later. :-) It also give other 
people an opportunity to voice an opinion.

And from a selfish perspective, it doesn't make sense to spend a lot of 
time developing a new document if it is going to be rejected.

The purpose of these discussions are both to improve my understanding of 
the project enough such that I can contribute with code or documentation 
patches, as well as to get a feel for what is acceptable, so I'm not 
pointlessly spinning my wheels.

What I'd like to do as a next step is post some proposed changes to the 
man page. If they sound reasonable, I convert them into a proper patch 
against the CVS trunk.

  -Tom

-- 
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/e/fps/3452158/