Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 05:45:27 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> To: Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org> Cc: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/52041: testing new mdoc-bug class Message-ID: <20030511024527.GA9150@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <20030510193250.C665@znfgre.qbhto.arg> References: <200305110053.h4B0rGd9004467@gothmog.gr> <20030511010700.GA4585@gothmog.gr> <20030511020519.GB13346@sixshooter.v6.thrupoint.net> <20030511021605.GB8548@gothmog.gr> <20030510193250.C665@znfgre.qbhto.arg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2003-05-10 19:33, Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Sun, 11 May 2003, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > I'm adding this class to separate bug reports of the docs/ category to > > two classes. Those that affect manpages (or other parts of the src/ > > tree) and those that affect doc/*. > > That sounds like a reasonable goal, but wouldn't a category name like > doc-src (or src-doc) make more sense? There is more documentation in the > tree than just mdoc. I can change it to doc-src or src-doc-bug very easily. The second will fit nicely among the existing classes but is probably too large to type manually. I don't really mind if the name is doc-src, src-doc, src-doc-bug or doc-src-bug. If the extra verbosity isn't too much I'd prefer the last one: doc-src-bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030511024527.GA9150>