From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proof-reading manuals (was Re: Rmail mbox-format branch) Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 17:06:52 -0500 (CDT) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <200409182206.i8IM6qd06407@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: <41406C46.6050505@pajato.com> <01c4969e$Blat.v2.2.2$d48c9a40@zahav.net.il> <20040909221947.GB11694@fencepost> <200409110249.i8B2nah12319@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200409150112.i8F1CnL22210@raven.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1095545277 1790 80.91.229.6 (18 Sep 2004 22:07:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 22:07:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 19 00:07:43 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1C8nMt-000337-00 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:07:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C8nSg-0002M7-JY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:13:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1C8nSY-0002KY-TY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:13:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1C8nSX-0002KA-Vi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:13:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C8nSX-0002K0-Pi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:13:33 -0400 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C8nMP-0003gz-IE; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:07:13 -0400 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8IM6uiU008055; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 17:06:56 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) id i8IM6qd06407; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 17:06:52 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-reply-to: (message from Richard Stallman on Thu, 16 Sep 2004 07:19:06 -0400) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:27256 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:27256 Richard Stallman wrote: For lispref this way of organizing things may be reasonable, but for man it makes no sense. It might be nice to have things like man/cl.texi updated, but such things are a luxury right now. What we worry about now is the Emacs and Elisp manual and info.texi. I agree. Could you remove the other files from the `man' list, keeping only info.texi and those that are part of the Emacs manual? Also, remove gfdl.texi and gpl.texi if they are included. Done. I removed man/faq.texi, because it has nothing to do with the Emacs manual. Should we add man/faq.texi as something that should be updated? I removed man/ack.texi, because it is already listed separately. I still have to take care of some problems in some of the chapters I read and marked with LT. I have not yet sent my suggested changes for man/text.texi. The original aim was to have everything proofread by at least two persons. For the Elisp manual, that seems unrealistic now. For the Emacs manual, it might be better if we kept that standard, if possible. For instance, I did read man/mule.texi, but I am not a heavy user of that stuff. Thus it might be better if somebody using it more heavily would double check it. There are other instances like that. The Emacs manual could easily be checked by somebody not knowing Texinfo. The way we have organized things now (referring to the .texi files) might not be very understandable to such a person. Sincerely, Luc.