Yaakov Nemoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> It can be better than one Wiki, but I think that we need a on-line >> version that the people can read the newest modifications. Because >> If only a group, or one person, works in this job the manual could >> turn boring and discourage people to send fixes. I think that we >> need most people possible >> > > thats what CVS usually is for. When its software, its all the > experimental updates being worked on, some good, some currently > broken, so the same applies to software for the human mind as well. > Using a wiki when you already have CVS to do that is redundant, and > pointless when as said before, a wiki is less secure to people > meddling and putting false information in. You can track who made > what changes with CVS with very fine detail.
Well, I don't want to be rude but it just seems to me no one is interested in working on the Hurd Reference Guide. I can not remember a single patch for it sent to the mailinglists as long as I am subscribed (almost 3 years). Added to that, if anyone has a patch, just send it in. I am willing to proof read every patch that makes sense. And I am sure a lot of people will do the same. -- Marco _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
