Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 20:58:49 -0600 From: Chris Costello <chris@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Matt Penna <mdp1261@ritvax.rit.edu> Cc: doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: splitting FAQ ch. 9 Message-ID: <20020119205848.K2208@holly.calldei.com> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020119184915.035bf620@vmspop.isc.rit.edu>; from mdp1261@ritvax.rit.edu on Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 07:00:35PM -0500 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> <20020119220019.GA69416@helios.dub.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20020119184915.035bf620@vmspop.isc.rit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday, January 19, 2002, Matt Penna wrote: > 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.) Perhaps either a legacy documents Web site or a condensed legacy FAQ would suffice... Actually, we have that! See http://docs.freebsd.org/faq/en/ I see no reason why the FAQ cannot be cleaned up in light of this fact, replacing the old and confusing material with a single reference at the top of the FAQ to the above URL. -- +-------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Chris Costello | Fine day to work off excess energy. | | chris@FreeBSD.org | Steal something heavy. | +-------------------+-------------------------------------+ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020119205848.K2208>