Re: LDP still relevant?
On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 01:36:14PM +0200, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> Hi Tom M,
>
> On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 11:54:58AM +0100, Tom M wrote:
> >
> > The Linux Documentation Project [1] is mentioned in Debian's docs, often as the
> > only source of general GNU/Linux docs. As far as I can see, it is largely an
> > outdated resource; floppy disks are regularly mentioned, there are links to
> > software tarballs, etc. In fact, none of the "most popular Linux documents
> > and manuals" [2] have seen updates in the last 13 years, some as many as 20.
> > (And they are 2 clicks from the front page!) I don't think we are doing anyone
> > a favour by mentioning these, and should consider other sources.
>
> Yup; very true. Submitting bugreports could be a fist step in solving this
> embarrassing problem.
Indeed. It would probably be more useful for the LDP to be updated
than to abandon it, if only because it has an easily recognised name.
If there are better sources, the LDP should adopt them, replacing the
outdated ones. Bug reports citing the better documents might help.
-- hendrik
>
> Bye,
>
> Joost
>
Reply to: