Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <39A42785.F35F82DF@ece.gatech.edu> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 15:35:33 -0400 From: Charles Wilson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Subject: Re: FAQ-O-Matic (Was: perl-5.6.0 ready for test! (IMPORTANT READ THIS MESSAGE ON MAINTAINER STATUS!)) References: <8600BF007197944F8DD3906E40CB428005D83C AT itdomain001 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au> <20000822204228 DOT B770 AT cygnus DOT com> <39A3238D DOT 3C8A6160 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <1845-Wed23Aug2000130354+0100-starksb AT ebi DOT ac DOT uk> <20000823151941 DOT G5205 AT cygnus DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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