discuss: Archived Documents
Subject:
Re: Archived Documents
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
16 Jul 2001 16:59:23 -0000
Message-Id: <20010716094925.F226@lafn.org>
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 06:43:34PM -0400, David Merrill wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 01:51:00PM -0700, David Lawyer wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 12:42:30AM -0400, David Merrill wrote:
> > > We have long kept a list of `unmaintained' documents. However, we
> > > don't have a real `archive' separate from that. This needs to change.
> > > More on that later, though...
> >
> > Another category is documents seeking a maintainer. This is where
> > the current maintainer doesn't want to do it anymore but is willing to
> > keep maintaining it until someone else comes along. This could be
> > called the "maintainer wanted" category.
>
> This would be a pain for me to implement, so I'm not going to. You can
> look at my code and if you can come up with a clean way to do it, I'll
> accept a patch.
It's something that needs doing. There are a lot of such cases.
I also suggest that unmaintained docs that are not obsolete be kept
with the main collection. Then the unmaintained directory would
contain symbolic links to the main collection. Actually, with this
arrangement, one could classify a doc where the author is looking for a
maintainer as "unmaintained" even thought it is actually being
maintained (at least temporarily).
>
> > One way to do this in on a trial basis. The old maintainer may want
> > to be able to reclaim the doc if s/he thinks that the new maintainer
> > is not doing a satisfactory job. It would be up to the old maintainer
> > as to whether or not s/he wants to go this route.
> >
> > What about calling the archive "obsolete" to show that the docs in
> > them don't really need a new maintainer (unless someone really wants
> > to do it).
>
> Obsolete ~= archived. Obsolete documents are archived. However, they
> are not obsolete to *everyone*. There are people out there running
> 2.0.x kernels, and for them the document may still be current.
Then it wouldn't be classified as obsolete. But if almost no one is
using such software and there is better software available for free,
why not call it obsolete? There are some stores that sell parts for
old collector-cars (such as Ford Obsolete). I don't think it's an
insult to call it this. Obsolete may also imply that most (or all) of
the material in the doc is now covered by other current docs.
I`ll go along with "archived" but I think "obsolete" is slightly
better. "Obsolete" clearly implies that it's not in the main
collection.
David Lawyer
