[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: man pages

On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 09:24:48AM -0400, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> These issues are important enough to debate right now.  Nobody says
> "Stop all efforts and do not continue work on the LSB until
> $myRequirement is in!!" -- but nonetheless, issues that are _currently_
> not addressed by the LSB and that some people feel that _should- be
> addressed still need to be discussed for possible future modifications
> of the LSB.

Ok. Is anyone advocating a position that man pages should be excluded
from lsb-compliant systems? Of course not. If you want to put in a man
page, go for it. There's not much to debate *other than* whether it's
the place of the lsb to *force* compliance with a previously nonexistent
man page policy, especially this early in the lsb's life cycle.

> The only thing I object to is the one argument that keeps coming up: The
> LSB does not do it (right now), so we should not want to do it (in the
> future).  That's no good.

If it's not going to be put in until the future and the decision is not
going to be made until the future, why not put off the debate until the
future? If someone's looking for things to do, I'm sure some high
priority things could be found--and doing all of those would bring the
future that much closer.

Mike Stone

Reply to: