From owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 9 17:21:36 2003 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 490D637B401; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 17:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pittgoth.com (14.zlnp1.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.149.111]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3175943F85; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 17:21:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mobile.pittgoth.com ([192.168.0.5]) by pittgoth.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id h3A0LYBG090704; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 20:21:34 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 08:20:06 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes To: Sean Chittenden Message-Id: <20030410082006.2f4f748b.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200304092345.h39Njx9K066928@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <200304092345.h39Njx9K066928@repoman.freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.10claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en Makefile www/en/conspectus Makefile Makefile.inc README index.sgml www/en/conspectus/advocacy Makefile Makefile.inc www/en/conspectus/advocacy/2000 Makefile Makefile.inc index.sgml www/en/conspectus/advocacy/2000/11 05.sgml 12.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: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:21:36 -0000 On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 16:45:59 -0700 (PDT) Sean Chittenden wrote: [SNIP] > The conspectus was well intentioned, but hasn't been touched in three > years. If someone feels passionately about these bits and wants to > ressurect summarizing hot topics/discussions (similar to what PostgreSQL > or Ruby does for their weekly news), so be it, but this content is just > too dated to be of any use. > Where was this discussed? I don't remember ever reading a thread about this. -- Tom Rhodes