From owner-cvs-doc  Mon Sep  1 14:18:52 1997
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-doc>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA20560
          for cvs-doc-outgoing; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 14:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20549;
          Mon, 1 Sep 1997 14:18:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA17698; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 14:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
To: Peter da Silva <pds@FreeBSD.ORG>
cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/FAQ FAQ.sgml 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 01 Sep 1997 13:56:42 PDT."
             <199709012056.NAA21593@freefall.freebsd.org> 
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 14:18:40 -0700
Message-ID: <17694.873148720@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Ermm.  Sorry, but this just isn't going to fly, Peter.

You don't just spam over the current copy of *anything* in the CVS
repository, be it docs or code, with an outdated copy and call it
finished.  You're supposed to merge your changes together with the
current state of something before you commit again, and asking people
to tell you if you've clobbered something of theirs sort of misses the
point.  It was your responsibity to merge the preexisting changes in
without any further intervention on the part of the original authors
being necessary - any other scheme would simply lead to chaos.

Please bring changes in more gradually or, dare I say it, pass the
mantle for the FAQ onto someone who has the time to deal with it on a
more timely basis (I've been wondering for quite some time whether
that might not be a good idea in any case).

					Jordan