This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: FAQ-O-Matic (Was: perl-5.6.0 ready for test! (IMPORTANT READ THIS MESSAGE ON MAINTAINER STATUS!))
Chris Faylor wrote:
>
> I agree that there must be active moderators. Maybe FOM isn't the ideal
> solution. I can also easily see this becoming a Q&A forum, especially
> given our disappointing experience with the 'todo' list.
>
> Probably, we could get the same behavior by maintaining the documents in
> CVS and giving specific people checkin privileges.
[1] e.g. a FAQs module, with documents that can be turned into html
(nightly as part of the cygwin build process?) -- or are html themselves
-- and served via http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/FAQs/ ?
> >Chris, is there an issue with resources? The server will have to do
> >quite a bit more than spit out html. Will Red Hat, Inc. come after
> >you if someone posts warez or DVD decryption source or ...
Yikes. I hadn't even thought of that...
>
> The machine is pretty beefy but the network connection isn't. In fact,
> I've been contemplating elminating direct cygwin downloads from sources.
> They are pretty much swamping the connection.
If you do this, then the /private/ section needs to be mirrored as well.
I have no evidence, but I believe that the bulk of the the downloads are
folks trying to test the latest & greatest -- e.g. my cvs stuff, or
Michael's sumo-rpm stuff...
Otherwise, I've no objections to turning off direct downloads.
>
> >I'm not looking forward to moving the existing Cygwin FAQ to FOM -- it
> >would be a big job at first. But if it helps us deliver a better
> >product, I'm all for it. (Maybe nobody was thinking about the
> >existing FAQ, but if it works well for Cygwin Apps, then it's probably
> >a good idea for all of it.)
>
> I wasn't really thinking about the existing FAQ but it's a good point.
> Consistency would be nice, especially if we have something that works.
>
> We probably should look into some automated method for updating the FAQ
> so that your changes don't require a manual "send mail to DJ" step.
If the main cygwin FAQ was also part of this hypothetical FAQs module in
CVS, as in point [1] above, then this problem is solved, too.
--Chuck