Alexander E. Patrakov
semzx at newmail.ru
Mon Jun 9 21:20:56 PDT 2003
On Monday 09 June 2003 21:08, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> > Maybe we should put some objective criteria (e.g. required skills) to the
> > book. E.g. a person who did not recompile at least his/her distribution
> > kernel will probably be disappointed with LFS.
> Well, I wouldn't want to set such a hard limit,
Then make it a soft limit, e.g. "If you recompiled your distribution kernel,
it's a good sign that you have some of the required skills"
> For example; the whoread, whonotread and prerequisites should
> be 1 page; named "assumptions". Alex Groenewoud suggested such a
> structural change at
404 Not Found
> > And maybe even a short exam on the web page (didn't pass => don't read
> > the book)
> Well, I'm trying to advocate adjusting the book's structure and logical
> flow so newbies are more generally ruled out because they have a harder
> time following it. I don't think these quizes are effective; esp.
> because they have the potential to rule out people who could read the
> book but will be annoyed by the arrogance of setting such an entry point.
I did not express my point clearly enough. There should be a link "test your
skills" on the assumptions page. Readers are not required to click on it.
> > A dragon's solution: mention the mailing lists at the _end_ of the FAQ
> > and nowhere else.
> We don't want information to become less accessible, so I don't think
> this is a proper solution. Previously I and other people have suggested:
I also think it is not a proper solution, but we do want to make lists less
accessible than the FAQ, don't we?
> * when someone subscribes to a mailinglist, mail the FAQ or a link
> thereto in the "welcome" e-mail. IIRC, at the time this was deemed
> unappropriate because it's assumed that people check out the FAQ before
> they subscribe.
And this assumption disproved itself. Well, it may become true upon
restructuring the book. I vote for it.
> * post (a portion of the) FAQ regularly to the mailinglists. This has
> the same disadvantages of the above, and is also annoying for regulars
> and a waste of bandwidth. I still don't understand why this solution was
> chosen previously.
Regulars can easily set up filters. And it may save more bandwidth than it
will consume. This solution is accepted in some newsgroups (e.g.
comp.lang.c++), but I really have never seen this in mailing lists.
> Based on my experience on these lists, I can say that people generally
> find the mailing lists _before_ they find the FAQ. This is a structural
> problem with *both the book and the website*.
Here we agree.
> In addition to the above
> suggestion I propose the following:
<good things snipped>
Alexander E. Patrakov
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev