new layout for the book (Gerard?)

Matthew Burgess matthew at
Sun Jan 11 11:18:22 PST 2004

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 13:57:11 -0500 (EST)
Bill's LFS Login <lfsbill at> wrote:

> The most relevant thread, AFAICT, began here.
> <
> mber/040924.html>

Cheers Bill, I've been busy on my XML stuff today so to be honest didn't
want to get distracted by something else.  As I've now hit a brick wall
at the moment I'm back to this one.

> Replies from some editors and others, including Anderson, Bill, Kevin,
> James R., Richard, Jeremy, Tushar, Greg, Archaic. As is common on this
> list, the original topic got left behind (not a complaint, just
> observation) and I can't see any conclusive decision.

I don't see a conclusive decision either, it appears as if we were all
waiting (maybe just subconsciously) for Gerard to give the "Yes" or
"No"...exactly what the recent Organisational matters were supposed to
be preventing IIRC.
> The overall response is that everybody seemd to see a lot of positives
> and would like something limilar (or exactly what was proposed) to get
> done.

Yep, that was my take on things as well.

> I presume you all saw my post proposing that one of the editor's coord
> a summary and decision-making process. It still seems a good idea to
> me.

IMO people have had plenty of opportunity to voice their opinions
already (in both the original thread and in this one).  As no-one has
objected strongly (if at all) I'm taking it as Alex's contributions are

> As an interested community member, I will suggest that if the editors
> agree that Alex's proposals merit inclusion, get on with the job.

I'll review the two patches posted earlier today by Alex and apply
them shortly.

Best regards,


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list