> For example,
> no one owns linux/Documentation. As the person nominally in charge of
> linux/Documentation/Changes, there's no one between me and
> you, period, let
> alone anyone between me and you that you trust.... And I
> realize that you
> don't consider documentation very important, but there are
> other segments of
> the Linux source tree for which this breakdown in hierarchy
> is also true....
Here's an idea :
Take linux/Documentation and split it into a separate package.
that way Linus doesn't need to care about documentation, it can
be maintained separately. Having documentation packages co-released
with the kernel, but separately maintained would fix this problem,
would it not?
Dana Lacoste
Ottawa, Canada
> that way Linus doesn't need to care about documentation, it can
> be maintained separately. Having documentation packages co-released
> with the kernel, but separately maintained would fix this problem,
> would it not?
Its then permanently out of date, and you can't keep the two tied together.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 07:03:05AM -0800, Dana Lacoste wrote:
> Take linux/Documentation and split it into a separate package.
> that way Linus doesn't need to care about documentation, it can
> be maintained separately. Having documentation packages co-released
> with the kernel, but separately maintained would fix this problem,
> would it not?
Alas this would simply make it more difficult for me to update things.
For example I update Documentation/networking/8139too.txt each time
there is a corresponding update to drivers/net/8139too.c. Having to go
from current situation to patching two totally separate trees would be a
PITA and regression from current workflow.
Jeff