another KJ project: trashing obsolete documentation

another KJ project: trashing obsolete documentation

[Robert P. J. Day]

  it occurs to me that a useful project would be to identify anything
under the Documentation/ directory that no longer has any value and
can be removed, just to keep readers from being misled by out-of-date
documentation.

  anything there that looks eminently removable?

rday
--

====================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
    Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca                          Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
====================================

Re: another KJ project: trashing obsolete documentation

[Adrian Bunk]

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 01:43:30PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
>   it occurs to me that a useful project would be to identify anything
> under the Documentation/ directory that no longer has any value and
> can be removed, just to keep readers from being misled by out-of-date
> documentation.
> 
>   anything there that looks eminently removable?

That should not be a KJ project.

I've already removed some of the worst documentation.

The problem is that most documentation still contains some valuable 
bits.

And letting janitors judge what "no longer has any value" could easily 
result in a fiasco similar to what happened when janitors discovered 
checkpatch.

> rday

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: another KJ project: trashing obsolete documentation

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 01:43:30PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> >   it occurs to me that a useful project would be to identify anything
> > under the Documentation/ directory that no longer has any value and
> > can be removed, just to keep readers from being misled by out-of-date
> > documentation.
> >
> >   anything there that looks eminently removable?
>
> That should not be a KJ project.
>
> I've already removed some of the worst documentation.
>
> The problem is that most documentation still contains some valuable
> bits.
>
> And letting janitors judge what "no longer has any value" could
> easily result in a fiasco similar to what happened when janitors
> discovered checkpatch.

i understand the potential for over-enthusiasm, which is why i started
off just by *asking* if people knew of anything that was removable,
whereupon there could be a discussion.  but your point is well-taken
so let's just pretend i'd worded that differently in the first place.
:-)

rday
--

====================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
    Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca                          Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
====================================