From owner-freebsd-doc Thu May 11 0:22: 4 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from axl.ops.uunet.co.za (axl.ops.uunet.co.za [196.31.2.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD0E537B872 for ; Thu, 11 May 2000 00:21:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sheldonh@axl.ops.uunet.co.za) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.ops.uunet.co.za) by axl.ops.uunet.co.za with local-esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1) id 12pnHj-000BVn-00; Thu, 11 May 2000 09:21:27 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Dirk GOUDERS Cc: Eric Ogren , doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Removing 2.X entries from FAQ? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 11 May 2000 08:15:01 +0200." <200005110615.IAA16382@musashi.et.bocholt.fh-ge.de> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 09:21:27 +0200 Message-ID: <44254.958029687@axl.ops.uunet.co.za> Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 11 May 2000 08:15:01 +0200, Dirk GOUDERS wrote: > Hmm, while having read your posting, I was asking myself, if it would > be useful, if the different releases include their own FAQ - only > relevant for that particular release... > I'm not sure if that subject has already been discussed, some time > ago. It has and it was unanimously decided by all (except for a few who don't actually contribute anything) that it's too much work, given that most frequently asked questions relate to more than one release. I agree that ancient, crusty questions should either be removed (reducing the signal-to-noise ratio of the FAQ) or relegated to a "legacy FAQ". Either one takes work, although this work can be undertaken incremenetally, as individuals notice crusty questions. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message