From owner-freebsd-doc Sat Jan 19 16: 1: 5 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from vms4.rit.edu (vms4.isc.rit.edu [129.21.3.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D075E37B404 for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 16:00:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from sonic.rit.edu ([129.21.10.175]) by ritvax.isc.rit.edu (PMDF V5.2-32 #40294) with ESMTPA id <01KD9L02FERQDMPDKU@ritvax.isc.rit.edu> for doc@freebsd.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 19:00:47 EST Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 19:00:35 -0500 From: Matt Penna Subject: Re: splitting FAQ ch. 9 In-reply-to: <20020119220019.GA69416@helios.dub.net> X-Sender: mdp1261@vmspop.isc.rit.edu To: doc@freebsd.org Message-id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020119184915.035bf620@vmspop.isc.rit.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <20020119081751.A44161@blackhelicopters.org> <20020117110921.B32325@blackhelicopters.org> <20020118030554.GC17795@freebsdmall.com> <20020118211213.J2208@holly.calldei.com> <20020119045555.GA57083@helios.dub.net> <20020119081751.A44161@blackhelicopters.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 02:00 PM 1/19/02 -0800, you wrote: >On Sat, 19 Jan 2002 at 08:17:51 -0500, Michael Lucas wrote: > > Hmmm... why would we want to start over with the FAQ? It's really not > > that bad, for a document that covers 2.1.x, 2.2.x, 3.x, and 4.x. Much > > of that information is still quite useful for people who are running > > older releases. > >Well, that's one reason. We ripped all the 2.x stuff out of the >handbook a while back, and should probably do the same with the FAQ. If >somebody's been using FreeBSD long enough to still be using 2.x, I would >assume they have enough clue to keep it running. I whole-heartedly agree that the FAQ should be cleaned up, but I'm not sure that discarding information on older releases would be a good idea. Perhaps categorizing questions according to release, or even keeping separate documents for older releases would be beneficial? (I.e., 2.x FAQ, 3.x FAQ, etc.) I realize it's fairly unlikely, but somewhere out there are very old systems that cannot be upgraded to a new version for one reason or another, so the information in the FAQ (and handbook) that pertains to old releases might prove useful to someone. I'm sure some people think I'm crazy for advocating the rentention of 5 year old FAQs, but I've had trouble keeping legacy systems running in the past because someone thought, "no one could possibly need these documents anymore," so I would advocate keeping the information on-line, albeit in a different location. Just my 2 cents. :) Matt -- Matt Penna mdp1261@rit.edu ICQ: 399825 S0ba on AOLIM "The trouble with computers, of course, is that they're very sophisticated idiots." -Dr. Who To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message