discuss: RPM Builder's Tricks and Traps HOWTO
Subject:
Re: RPM Builder's Tricks and Traps HOWTO
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
8 Sep 2004 08:03:16 -0000
Message-Id: <20040908072142.GC1249@davespc>
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 03:06:19PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> William West ####@####.####
> > > If it's gone thru the review process (as you pointed out), simply
> > > send it to ####@####.#### as you've always done in the past.
> > > I'll get it published. I have confidence in your language skills ;-)
> >
> > ok- that begs the question- does sending one's document(s) to
> > ####@####.#### get it to one of these "review coordinators"? If
> > so, why isn't it explicit in
> >
> > http://tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/submission.html
>
> I think this is a good question. Part of what was annoying me was
> that the whole procedure seems vague and poorly documented.
More than that. I think that the procedure needs simplification so that
it can be explained in one page. I wrote such a page but then was told
that what I wrote was not exactly our procedure. And I just haven't had
the time to follow up. To do this right involves a major rewrite of
both the Author Guide and the Reviewer HOWTO and I just don't have time
do this. Also, I'm not sure that the procedure I propose would be
accepted if I did. Also, as a proponent of LinuxDoc, I never learned
DocBook :-) Anyway, I hope to find time to work on this problem in the
future. ESR's experience is an interesting example of how we deter
potential authors.
David Lawyer
