| 1 |
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 16:19:34 Tanstaafl wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2010-03-10 9:07 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > The current opinion of the current author of the kernel upgrade |
| 4 |
> > guide says what you quoted. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > It's his opinion, it's what he thinks will work best for the |
| 7 |
> > majority of people. It's probably also the wording that has been |
| 8 |
> > proven to result in the least bugzilla entries and the fewest mails |
| 9 |
> > in his inbox from the "Help me!" mob. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> It is either a part of the *official* gentoo documentation, or it isn't. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> My understanding is that it is. Is that incorrect? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> In other words, it is not $random_guide found on the internet somewhere, |
| 16 |
> nor is it some gentoo dev's private wiki, it is formal, official gentoo |
| 17 |
> documentation - and that *is* a fact. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> If what you say is true, then I guess every single page of every single |
| 20 |
> bit of gentoo documentation should come with a big fat warning that |
| 21 |
> 'this is just someone's personal opinion, so don't give it any weight |
| 22 |
> whatsoever - hey, just do your own thang!'... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
You are twisting my words to mean something I did not say or mean or intend. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Please stop doing that. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Overall the docs are fine. That particular statement under discussion is bad |
| 29 |
advice as it implies something that is demonstrably not true. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Where did I say that all of the maintained official docs are low quality? I |
| 32 |
believe I said no such thing, nor implied it. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives