From owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 5 01:10:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45A8516A4CE; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 01:10:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsdmall.com (ns1.freebsdmall.com [69.50.233.146]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA2843D76; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 01:10:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from murray@freebsdmall.com) Received: by mail.freebsdmall.com (Postfix, from userid 2074) id F38041CDA5; Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:17:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:17:06 -0800 From: Murray Stokely To: Tom Rhodes Message-ID: <20041205011706.GC34130@freebsdmall.com> References: <200412050014.iB50EMgA007188@repoman.freebsd.org> <20041204195521.6a5d33e1@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041204195521.6a5d33e1@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-GPG-Key-ID: 1024D/0E451F7D X-GPG-Key-Fingerprint: E2CA 411D DD44 53FD BB4B 3CB5 B4D7 10A2 0E45 1F7D cc: Murray Stokely cc: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook Makefile book.sgml chapters.ent doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/firewalls Makefile chapter.sgml doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/security chapter.sgml X-BeenThere: cvs-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the doc and www trees List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 01:10:06 -0000 On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 07:55:21PM -0500, Tom Rhodes wrote: > Thanks for letting me know you were doing this, it stomped all > over the FAQ patch I had (still in discussion on -doc an reaching > a resolution) along with my idea of sectioning off the security > information (see the other discussion on -doc with Giorgos, Remko, > etc). This commit was required by your sectioning off of the security information into a separate part. You said you'd put firewalls as a chapter in a Security Part, and the discussion died after I said that moving the firewalls chapter out into a separate chapter seemed to be the point in common between the two proposals. I'm sorry that it conflicted with your FAQ patch (which came up after the discussion on moving the firewall chapter out). If you want to mail it to me I'll do the grunt work of updating the patch then mail it back to you. - Murray