Subject: RE: Another Manual ???
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Crossley <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/22/2000 04:30:55
Excuse my ignorance, but why is Perl a dirty word (might make interesting
readingin my book - it sure does on this list !! :-)
[mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of James Wetterau
Sent: Saturday, 22 January 2000 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: Another Manual ???
Thor Lancelot Simon says:
> > I'm awfully fond of Perl's POD (plain old documentation) system for
> > writing documentation. It is not a general purpose system for text
> Perl is not -- and will not be, unless you want to engage in fisticuffs
> with a substantial number of the current NetBSD developers -- included
> in NetBSD.
Hey, I didn't say Perl should be included with the NetBSD
distribution. I didn't say I thought Perl should be included with the
NetBSD distribution. I didn't say that Perl's documentation system
should be included with the NetBSD system. OK?
I especially didn't say I wanted a fight. And how would my engaging
in fisticuffs have anything to do with Perl's inclusion in or
exclusion from the NetBSD distribution? You're ranting at me for no
I said I thought POD has some good ideas, specifically its simplicity
and utility in generating other formats. I pointed out in what man
pages you can find out about those features. The man page I spoke of
is available via the NetBSD Packages collection. And I stand by my
claim that whatever system NetBSD documentation gets written in could
take a lesson or two from the simplicity and flexibility of the POD
There's no need to fly off the handle and start ranting about fist
All the best,