Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 20:38:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> Cc: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/52041: testing new mdoc-bug class Message-ID: <20030510203753.H665@znfgre.qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <20030511024527.GA9150@gothmog.gr> References: <200305110053.h4B0rGd9004467@gothmog.gr> <20030511010700.GA4585@gothmog.gr><20030511021605.GB8548@gothmog.gr> <20030511024527.GA9150@gothmog.gr>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Sun, 11 May 2003, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2003-05-10 19:33, Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 May 2003, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > > I'm adding this class to separate bug reports of the docs/ category to
> > > two classes. Those that affect manpages (or other parts of the src/
> > > tree) and those that affect doc/*.
> >
> > That sounds like a reasonable goal, but wouldn't a category name like
> > doc-src (or src-doc) make more sense? There is more documentation in the
> > tree than just mdoc.
>
> I can change it to doc-src or src-doc-bug very easily. The second will
> fit nicely among the existing classes but is probably too large to type
> manually. I don't really mind if the name is doc-src, src-doc,
> src-doc-bug or doc-src-bug. If the extra verbosity isn't too much I'd
> prefer the last one: doc-src-bug.
Those all sound good to me, my big concern was that if your intention was
a category that covered all docs in src that the name reflect that. :)
Thanks,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030510203753.H665>