This will be my last email on this, since "I hate to rant", but not liking to,
and not refusing to are two different things.
Peter Green wrote:
> The point is that by pointing the original poster to the documentation, he
> might actually do *his* *own* *homework* (horrors!). In the process, he
> might actually learn something more than what he was asking.
>
> For instance, what if, after his original question, he asked, ``What are the
> valid formats for lines in a .qmail file?'' Or what if he didn't ask but was
> curious? Wow, that appears in the dot-qmail manpage as well.
I give on this portion. Though, perhaps it would have been better to say "here
is the answer, although if you look at the man page for <blah> you may find
other useful information as well".
>
>
> Further, Mr. Cazabon did NOT treat anyone ``like an idiot''. He *did* say,
> basically, RTFM even while pointing out the exact FM. What exactly would you
> have him do, reproduce the documentation for the mailing list everytime the
> question comes up? That's why there is documentation at all!
I feel that he did treat him like an idiot with the blatant statement "It's
documented, so it must be true.", it's a statement of "Haha, a opportunity to
be snide".
>
>
> One last interesting comment: In two years of running qmail on about six or
> seven different machines in different environments, I have *never* (that I
> can remember) found the documentation lacking. Chaotic or not, the qmail
> home page at <http://www.qmail.org/> is as comprehensive as anything I've
> ever seen.
Re-reading my original email to verify, I discovered that I had said the same
exact thing, that being "...The fact of the matter is that there is SO much
information available to the qmail community and it's not well organized...".
I guess it was my hidden call for some organization of documentation.
<snip>
--
Eric Garff
MyComputer.com System Admin
Our Tools. Your Site.
Just remember, if the world didn't suck, we'd all fall off.
--
