* Mark D. Carey wrote: > I am sorry for any confusion on this matter. OSoft never asked to have > our format as the official Apache Documentation. That would be quite > naive. Apache has an incredible documentation group and we have no intent > to interfere.
well, understood. > All I asked is if we could be listed as an alternative > format for those people who wish to have all of their documentation in > one format, viewable offline. For example, MySQL offers their > documentation in HTML, .PDF, CHM, and ThoutReader™ formats. Actually, they don't. They just refer to the osoft.com site, where one needs to register to get the docs. I wasn't able the download just one thout documentation file without registering and go shopping (for $0.00) at your site (I didn't). (Well, I've downloaded the the thout .tar.gz file, just to have a look, but I couldn't even find a README file, which explains installation or usage etc.) I'm -1 on such a practice for the httpd docs. Anyway, I think, *if* we'd provide the thout format, then we'd need to incorporate the necessary transformation in our build system and would provide it from our own servers. Other opinions are, of course, highly appreciated. nd -- Winnetous Erbe: <http://pub.perlig.de/books.html#apache2> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
