Great, then if i got time i will take a closer look to the wiki FAQ so we
can bring it *here* ;)
El 26/4/2016 15:36, "Rich Bowen" escribió:
>
>
> On 04/25/2016 09:33 PM, Luis Gil wrote:
> > Actually i was thinking about some filtering, or maybe add some if
> > needed, but OFC i will not do work t
On 04/25/2016 09:33 PM, Luis Gil wrote:
> Actually i was thinking about some filtering, or maybe add some if
> needed, but OFC i will not do work that it will be in vain...
It's not in vain. We removed the FAQ because it was garbage, not because
we don't want an FAQ.
Also, the wiki was initiall
Actually i was thinking about some filtering, or maybe add some if needed,
but OFC i will not do work that it will be in vain...
On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 at 13:47 Rich Bowen wrote:
> History: we dropped the FAQ page because it was so grossly out of date
> that it wasn't readily salvageable. I don't
History: we dropped the FAQ page because it was so grossly out of date
that it wasn't readily salvageable. I don't object to Frequently Asked
Questions pages if they are indeed frequently asked questions. What we
had were not, and many of the answers were bad.
I haven't looked at the one in the Wi