| 1 |
On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 10:26:37PM +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Better would be to /do/ have multiple bugreports on it :) |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Including third-party articles? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Why not? If the reports are valid and can be fixed with the historical |
| 7 |
meaning in tact (i.e. the bugreport would also be valid at the time the |
| 8 |
article was originally written), we should do so. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
If the article is outdated but not wrong, we can have the bugreport marked |
| 11 |
as LATER. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
If the article is outdated and wrong, we can have the bugreport marked as |
| 14 |
LATER and hope that someone would write a new article that "includes" the |
| 15 |
fixes in the before mentioned bug reports. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Even if no-one ever writes a follow-up on the article, we would still have |
| 18 |
knowledge about the issues with the current article and, if needed, take |
| 19 |
appropriate measures. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Wkr, |
| 22 |
Sven Vermeulen |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Gentoo Foundation Trustee | http://foundation.gentoo.org |
| 26 |
Gentoo Documentation Project Lead | http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gdp |
| 27 |
Gentoo Council Member |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The Gentoo Project <<< http://www.gentoo.org >>> |
Archives