Re: Hurd documentation roadmap
Matthias Pfisterer wrote:
> 1. Update Webpages and FAQ (until end of this week):
> They should state that there is work ongoin to a new distribution of
> Hurd, which is already considered quite stable. They should give the
> reader the choice to either install the 0.2 release or the actual
> development state. As an interimistic solution, for installation steps,
> the documents should point to John Tobey's dump of installation
> procedure.
I am currently the maintainer of these FAQs. Please send corrections and
additions to me at mailto:sfavor@corridor.com. If you have significant
contributions to make , I can give you CVS access to the source. I plan
significant changes to the format and maintenance procedures during the
first part of next year, so please coordinate your efforts with me or they
will likely be lost. Currently, FAQomactic and Webrachet are being
considered. Since Debian is already using FAQomactic, it's the current
front-runner.
> Looking at the FAQs, I noticed that there are actually two FAQs: the
> gnu-hurd-faq and the debian-gnu-hurd-faq. It seems that one is derived
> from the other, the differences are quite minor, and they are even
> maintained by the same man! It is very unclear to me why there are two
> lists. If there were only historical reasons, I feel we should merge
> them. Having one list would avoid confusion to users and also lower the
> effort needed to maintain them.
There was a thread about this some months back. Basically, there are two
FAQs because there are two projects. The first is GNU Hurd which is the OS
itself. The second is Debian GNU/Hurd which is the debian distribution of
the Hurd. This distintion needs to be maintained even though it doesn't
make total sense at present. The GNU Hurd FAQ should contain Q&A about the
Hurd itself (something like the current Linux FAQ
http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP/FAQ/Linux-FAQ-1.html) and the Debian GNU/Hurd FAQ
should contain information particular to the Debain distribution of the
Hurd. Once the Hurd is off the ground, I suspect that the latter will be
merged back into what is now the Debian GNU/Linux FAQ
(http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ).
My current opinion is that the FAQs are not the most important documents
needed at present. They are EXTREMELY important, but there are other things
that are even more important. Most of these fall into the category of HOWTO
documents. Scan through the mailing lists and topics will stand out. I
haven't been putting Q&A into the FAQs that would take significant writing
to explain. For instance, the topic of partitioning. Trent wrote a
partitioning nomencleture page months ago that needs to be updated. Turning
this into a HOWTO would be great. Scan the lists and you'll find many
topics like this (X11, networking, installation, etc.).
Reply to: