Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3A4F2AF6.B4729130@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 12:47:50 +0000
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.17 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Start to section for KB on how to contribute to DJGPP
References: <3A4BA452 DOT BB6ADC3F AT bigfoot DOT com> <3A4CB0B3 DOT 9ADC93C AT softhome DOT net> <4331-Sun31Dec2000122524+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
> >
> > I think FAQ should be updated to refer to this section instead of
> > providing a few advices, as it does now.
> 
> Large parts of the FAQ should actually be converted into the Knowledge
> Base sections.  Feel free...
> 
> However, in order for me to remove section 22.3 (or some parts thereof)
> from the FAQ, the text in contrib.txi should say everything that this
> section says.  Right now, it doesn't (and neither am I sure Rich
> wanted to replace it).

I hadn't actually read section 22.3 before writing contrib.txi, I have to
admit. I have now and I don't think that contrib.txi makes section 22.3
obsolete. In fact, I think they are complimentary, for what I was
thinking. Naturally section 22.3 could/should refer to contrib.txi, when
it's completed & DJGPP 2.04 is released.

OK, perhaps calling it "contributing to DJGPP" was a bit misleading -
maybe "development tips for DJGPP" would be more appropriate.

BTW should FAQ section 22.3 also suggest CC'ing djgpp-workers with
patches, rather than just DJ?

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe
[ mailto:richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com | http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/ ]