On Tuesday 12 July 2005 00:06, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | Another idea that was coined on IRC is to have reviewing and commit > | after approval rules for the user manual, but to allow patches to the > | internals manual in without review. Is that something people are > | willing to consider and discuss? > > the idea that we don't review internal manual is worrysome. Some > years ago, I based a work on doc/c-tree.texi (thanks Mark!). But the > fact that it escaped continual revision as code gets added or improved > made it a dangerous documentation, because it led to writing codes > based on semantics that was no longer true. Got bugs, but don't know > which side is not working prorperly. Similarly, we don't really want > to let doc patches in without double-check.
Think about what you are saying: "Because almost nobody is working on the internals manual, the documentation bit-rotted." One way to get more people to work on the internals manual is by taking away the barriers. Gr. Steven
