This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: F-O-M (was: Patch for old FAQ links)
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Subject: Re: F-O-M (was: Patch for old FAQ links)
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 03:20:29 +0100 (CET)
- cc: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> Joseph, you probably missed that one. I agree with Jeff, and as you've
>> been the one checking/cleaning the FOM lately, I think you're perfectly
>> qualified to make a founded recommendation.
> My view is:
>
> * We should use a FAQ maintained in CVS through submission of patches to
> gcc-patches.
>
> * The FAQ could be one monolithic file (as with the old faq.html), or one
> file per section, or one file per question.
The way I read FAQs, I prefer the monolothic approach, though I do see the
benefits of the other approaches as well.
Concerning the F-O-M, I guess your assessment, together with Jeff's and
my earlier statements mean that we need an exit strategy to consolidate
the ``good'' pieces back into a regular FAQ.
You were going to clean up the F-O-M but then stopped to await the future
of F-O-M versus FAQ. Are you willing to perform this conversion?
Gerald
PS: I essentially agree with your other suggestions.
--
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/