Subject: Re: About send-pr
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Jan Schaumann <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/12/2002 11:52:42
Julio Merino <email@example.com> wrote:
> Jan Schaumann <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Usually we expect people to send their problems directly to www@, which
> > has a very fast turn-around time, so that (usually) PR tracking is not
> > really necessary. But I agree that for consistency a www category might
> > be useful (but then, it's often overlapping with 'doc' in general).
> Yes... `doc' may be better. So, when adding new things to documentation
> (not fixing typos, or the like), these changes should be sent to www@, right?
Hmmmm... not for everything. For example, if you have patches against
man-pages (which clearly belong into the 'doc' category), there would
be no point in submitting them to www@. I had thought that there was a
'doc' category for send-pr. I'll look into this.
'Hrrm, this reminds me of the Microsoft statement "Windows XP is the most
reliable version of Windows ever", or as we say in assembly, "nop".' - ali