From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Feb 14 14:27:06 2005
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 866DF16A4CE; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:27:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from volginfo.ru (ns.volginfo.ru [217.23.84.100])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id DB53643D49; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:27:05 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from den@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from [192.168.1.32] (llp-13.vistcom.ru [217.23.84.68])
	by volginfo.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6CCE12014; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 17:27:08 +0300 (MSK)
Message-ID: <4210B536.60800@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 17:27:02 +0300
From: Denis Peplin <den@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20041008
X-Accept-Language: ru, en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Remko Lodder <remko@elvandar.org>
References: <200502101204.j1AC42Il077257@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<420B587C.4000201@FreeBSD.org> <420DEB6B.5090206@elvandar.org>
In-Reply-To: <420DEB6B.5090206@elvandar.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org
cc: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/firewalls
	chapter.sgml
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:27:06 -0000

Hello!

Remko Lodder wrote:
> Denis Peplin wrote:
>> It seems that it is better to rename "Building the Rule Script"
>> to something like "Building the Rule Script with Symbolic Substitution",
>> or simply "Symbolic Substitution",
>> because:
>>
>> "The rules are not important in this example; how the Symbolic 
>> substitution field are populated and used are."
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> 
> Hi Den,
> 
> I think: "Building the Rule Script with Symbolic Substitution"
> Is the best option of the 2 :-).
> 
> cheers ! :)

Title modified, thanks!
:)