From owner-freebsd-doc Mon Mar 16 16:33:20 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA21829 for freebsd-doc-outgoing; Mon, 16 Mar 1998 16:33:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA21819 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 1998 16:33:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA27426; Mon, 16 Mar 1998 16:31:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) To: Greg Lehey cc: Studded , FreeBSD-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Documentation plan? In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 17 Mar 1998 08:48:47 +1030." <19980317084847.04060@freebie.lemis.com> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 16:31:55 -0800 Message-ID: <27422.890094715@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > I don't think you can. Trying to impose that sort of discipline on > the handbook is equivalent to tell the hackers when to commit their > code. It's a volunteer operation, and people will continue to do > things their way, frequently with the policy of content over style. I wasn't suggesting that the original authors have this imposed on them, simply that an "editor" needed to go through and turn the original copy into something closer to what makes a decent handbook. Considering the difference in quality with the results, I don't think that anyone would object, nor does the average engineer feel as strongly about their textual output (which most feel sucks anyway and only do it as a last resort) as they do about their code. Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message