RE: Python Tutorial 2.0 (addemendum)

[Gregory Leblanc <GLeblanc cu-portland edu>]

David sent me two emails, this is the shorter one.  I'll forward both of
them to the list as soon as I'm done writing this one.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David B. Harris [mailto:dbarclay10@yahoo.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 9:38 AM
> To: Gregory Leblanc
> Subject: RE: Python Tutorial 2.0 (addemendum)
> 
> P.S.: After reading that last email, Greg seemed to feel that 
> people should go on over to the LDP if they wanted to write a 
> HOWTO on how to set up PPP. What, and Linus wouldn't accept a 
> kernel patch for a driver if that person wasn't a member of 
> the "Kernel Team"? Come on, I though we were supposed to help 
> each other.

Anybody who writes code that's of good enough quality to go into the Linux
kernel is a member of the "Kernel Team".  The exact same type of thing
applies here.  What I meant was, write your docs, and submit them using the
LDP guidelines, TO the LDP.  I didn't mean to separate anybody, since I'm on
this list, the OSWG list, the LDP list, the SAMBA docs list, and probably a
whole slew of others that I can't remember.  :-)  But these documents are
not appropriate to GNOME unless they apply to GNOME, running on ANY OS.
GNOME is not Linux specific, thus the documentation cannot be Linux
specific.  Now, assuming that there is a GNOME PPP application that works on
any OS with PPP support, then document this application.  If you want to
have a step-by-step tutorial of how to use GNOME PPP to get a PPP connection
on Linux, and it requires some things that are strictly Linux specific, then
it shouldn't be part of the GNOME documentation.  I'm sure that somebody
will disagree with me here, and say that we should have it not only for
Linux, but also for Solaris, AIX, HPUX, SCO, etc.  I don't think that's the
right way to do it, but I do acknowledge that it is a possibility.  Later,
	Greg