Suggestion (was Re: Apparent bash-ism in bootscripts)

Nathan Coulson conathan at
Wed Jan 28 11:16:03 PST 2004

> Bill Maltby, LFS Organizational wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Jeremy Utley wrote:
>>>On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 14:57, Ken Moffat wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Nathan Coulson wrote:
>>>Thanks for the input, Ken!  We really appreciate it.  I'm going to open
>>>a line of communication with the BLFS-Dev guys, check with them about
>>>what process they would want to follow to have us submit bootscript
>>>changes to them (patches to the book sent to LFS-Dev, or other methods).
>>>To the rest of the community:  Now's your chance!  If you've ever wanted
>>>to see some functionality included in the bootscripts, and feel its
>>>something that would benefit the ENTIRE LFS community, I welcome you to
>>>forward your feedback to Nathan and myself.  My email is
>>>jeremy at, and Nathan's is now
>>>nathan at
>> Just wanted to make a suggestion about this last part. You may have
>> thought of it already.
>> When you post those various suggestions for comment on the lists, I
>> suggest making a separate topic for each unrelated suggestion. One of
>> the problems with lists is that a single thread can really wander
>> because of the way people's brains associate things and then they post
>> right in that thread.
>> My thought is a separate thread for each major area will aid both you
>> and the community in keeping focus on a particular topic in a thread and
>> lead to faster decisions with less cruft muddying the waters.
> If I might add one more suggestion along this line of thought.  One of
> the things I struggle with on the lists is "what are we after" or "what
> is the status with that decision" in a concise format.  The topics and
> RFC's wander and it is difficult (at least for me) to keep track,
> especially if a decision was made.  Would you guys be willing to keep a
> wiki page going for this?  Make it a simple bulleted list of features
> you are thinking about implementing.  Keep relevant list thread url's
> there about discussion of that piece/feature and then also put the
> decision of "do it" or not there with the link to the list where it was
> decided.  People can also place thier direct vote for a feature or topic
> right there as well.
> I would suggest we think about this approach for a lot of decisions we
> need to make about the book.  The owner of the RFC or idea would be
> responsible to keep up with the page to keep everyone else up to date as
> well.  This, IMO, would potentially help with the "conversation die in
> the list" issue we seem to have.
> Thoughts?

I think using a wiki would be a great way to organize this in the short term.

[so, now I have to learn how to use CVS, and the wiki, and bugzilla].

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list