discuss: Inaction and Proceedures
Subject:
Re: Inaction and Proceedures
From:
Tor Slettnes ####@####.####
Date:
9 Nov 2004 08:41:31 -0000
Message-Id: <419082B9.1020902@slett.net>
Ben Rockwood wrote:
> Rick Moen wrote:
>
>> Quoting Ben Rockwood ####@####.####
>>
>>> I'm still waiting for review of my previous proposals made 2 weeks ago.
>>
>> Perhaps I've missed something, but LDP generally reviews submitted
>> documents rather than proposals. It might help if you were more
>> specific.
>
> Sorry if it seems like I'm just bitching, I guess it could look that
> way... but refering to the LDP Authors
> Guide: http://www.tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/process.html
>
> This guide outlines that step 1 is to join this list and:
> " If you have not yet written your documentation, please review our
> documents (current <http://tldp.org/HOWTO/HOWTO-INDEX/howtos.html>,
> unmaintained <http://tldp.org/authors/unmaint.html> and in progress
> <http://www.tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/process.html>) and
> submit a proposal to the list. Your proposal should include reasons
> why your document will be different than those already in the
> collection; or identify a subject that is currently missing from our
> documentation. For more information about writing proposals, please
> read Chapter 3
> <http://www.tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/propose.html>."
>
> Normally I wouldn't bother to adhere tightly to the rules, but given
> that someone spent alot of time writing an authors guide, and this
> outline is echo'ed in other places combined with the staff structure
> of the project, I just figured that you guys want this done in an
> organized and strict/proffessional manner, which is what I'm (trying
> :)), to do.
I think you misunderstand this text a little (as did I when I submitted
my first/only document). There is no formal review of document
proposals submitted to this list. Instead, the purpose of this proposal
is simply to give other interested parties a chance to give you input
early in your writing process -- for instance, whether a similar
document exists, if the document is considered a good idea or not,
etc.. If you post a link to the document (preferrably an HTML version
of it), then you'll probably get some comments on it (though you may
need to prod a couple of times). That's it.
There certainly seems like there are certain aspects of the TLDP process
that could be streamlined/professionalized a bit more (including, as I
understand, better handling/guidelines of legal aspects such as
copyrights and licensing). However, what you have encountered so far
does not, IMO, justify the statement
> Given the fact that the proceedures stated in the LDP Authors Guide
> have effectively broken done to the lack of activity on the part of
> contributing users or LDP staff [...]
(i.e. this is not a fact, and certainly not a given one).
-tor
