Re: Planning to split doc-rfc
> DRAFT STANDARDS doc-rfc-draft-std
> EXPERIMENTAL doc-rfc-experimental
> HISTORIC doc-rfc-historic
> PROPOSED STANDARDS doc-rfc-proposed-std
> STANDARDS doc-rfc-standard
> - doc-rfc-misc
> Comments? Better names? Should there be a dummy doc-rfc package to pull in
> the others?
The packaging should be tematic, I can't think of noone who would find this
split useful. RFCs implementation in the real world isn't related to the RFC
> (I'd still like a thematic split, but I still know no way to do that that
> doesn't imply looking through ~3000 RFCs manually, and that doesn't seem
Neither is blindly packaging all of them. I'd rather have 20 or 30 hand
picked interesting RFC that a bunch of unclassified ones.
doc-rfc-ip (or doc-rfc-networking ? )
... sound much more useful?