On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Stephen Frost wrote:
...
> If you feel an app should have certain documentation then feel free
> to complain to the authors until you get such documentation.
Definitly.
> I doubt it would be a good thing to require certain
> documentation as part of a standard.
>
> Stephen
>
I am not sure I agree with your last statement. If the documentation
in question makes sence to have, then why not require it? This is an
organizational issue that haunts the linux community.
An example: While porting a system to the sparc, We have had (and are
having) trouble getting a sparc patch. An updated man and info page would
help. I'm sure that most of us can come up with stories like this
one. Certainly REQUIRING a minimum of documentation (and updates) _could_
be a good thing, no?
We are building an operating system that may do just that in an effort to
ensure a complete system. (The development model *BSD like around the
Linux kernel and gnu tools.)
While part of the beauty of Open Source is the freedom to create and test
with the help of others, and with essentially no rules, I have seen that
this causes a lack of orginization that other systems use against us.
This is an interesting thing that the LSB, I hope, is pondering. With luck
we will have a well defined base OPERATING SYSTEM in the not too distant
future.
Matt
-- Darkstar Project on sourceforge.net Unix is best described as an old, sturdy tree. It is well structured, always growing, and has passed the test of time.- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:28 EST