On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 07:15:35PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> Documenting such local 'hacks' in the Handbook is a bit like rubber
> stamping them with the official 'recommended by FreeBSD' seal of
> approval.  I am not sure I would like that a lot.  Serious security
> problems may exist in stale, unmaintained ports.  It would be a bit
> bad to make it sound like the entire FreeBSD project approves and even
> recommends this sort of thing.

I can see both sides of this argument.  Maybe we need to split up FreeBSD
documentation into two domains, similarly to the way FreeBSD software is
split into two domains (core and ports) -- and thus have a place outside
the FreeBSD handbook for the same, more-than-professional quality of
documentation, but covering things we wouldn't be comfortable putting in
the FreeBSD Handbook itself.

Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
Quoth Doug Linder: "A good programmer is someone who always looks both
ways before crossing a one-way street."

Attachment: pgpCFX5OhhppR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to