Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 09:10:06 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: A cygwin mailing list experiment Message-ID: <20010508091006.B22644@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com References: <20010508082052 DOT G21710 AT redhat DOT com> <002e01c0d7bf$8f8ece00$a300a8c0 AT nhv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <002e01c0d7bf$8f8ece00$a300a8c0@nhv>; from nhv@cape.com on Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:05:29AM -0400 On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:05:29AM -0400, Norman Vine wrote: >Christopher Faylor writes: >> >>It looks like I have things tuned well enough to accomodate the recent >>increases in activity. I do think that there are procedural ways to >>deal with the problems in the list, though. >> >>Improving cygwin's documentation and making it available as a man or >>info page is one way. >> >>Weekly FAQ submissions is another. >> >>Standardized FAQ-like responses to repeated queries (e.g., "Why doesn't >>chmod work") is another. > >Have you cosidered having a wiki based Cygwin FAQ > >There are many but this is one of the better ones. >http://twiki.org/ We've talked about FOM in the past. This seems similar. I think it would end up being like the todo list now. About, every other day, we get a submission that says something like "Me want Fortran 66, you get." I assume that any collaborative system involving cygwin users would degrade to the lowest common denominator, which is pretty low (I said I was cynical). This is also the reason that we don't have a Cygwin bug reporting system. cgf