Return-Path: owner-LDP-L@cornell.edu
Received: from listproc.mail.cornell.edu (listproc.mail.cornell.edu [132.236.56.14]) by keos.Helsinki.FI (8.6.9/H46) with SMTP id JAA25226 for <LARS.WIRZENIUS@CS.HELSINKI.FI>; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 09:35:01 +0200
Received: from host ([127.0.0.1]) by listproc.mail.cornell.edu with SMTP id <98347-3>; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 02:29:49 -0500
Received: from cornell.edu ([132.236.56.6]) by listproc.mail.cornell.edu with SMTP id <96909-1>; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 02:29:33 -0500
Received: from cornell.edu (PHQUERY) by cornell.edu with cornell-phquery id <372901-3>; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 02:29:23 -0500
Received: from extra.ucc.su.OZ.AU ([129.78.64.4]) by cornell.edu with SMTP id <372908-10>; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 02:29:13 -0500
Received: from extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (terryd@extro [129.78.128.1]) by extra.ucc.su.OZ.AU (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id SAA18661 for <LDP-L@cornell.edu>; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 18:29:07 +1100
Received: (terryd@localhost) by extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (8.6.9/8.6.6) id SAA08602 for LDP-L@cornell.edu; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 18:29:04 +1100
Message-Id: <199412050729.SAA08602@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU>
Date: 	Mon, 5 Dec 1994 02:29:04 -0500
Reply-To: LDP-L@cornell.edu
Sender: owner-LDP-L@cornell.edu
From: Terry Dawson <terryd@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU>
To: Linux Documentation Project writers <LDP-L@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: Some comments
In-Reply-To: <199412042150.NAA04826@netcom14.netcom.com> from "Al Longyear" at Dec 4, 94 04:50:23 pm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-PH: V4.1@cornell.edu (Cornell Modified) 
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.1 -- ListProcessor by CREN
Content-Length: 1013
Status: RO
X-Status: 


> Matt suggested reamining it to the PPP-HOWTO. I don't really object to this
> name, however, it really is a FAQ. It does not describe 'how to' use the
> product, but rather a series of problems and their solutions which have been
> pervasive through both my email and the PPP development mail list at niksula.

Thanks Al,
I'll take a look and modify the NET-2-HOWTO to suit. Some recent discussions
may well see a similar style document for SLIP soon.


Just as a sanity check, how many of the rest of the HOWTO authors get
abusive mail relating to their documents ? I seem to have something
approaching a 20:1 ratio of complaint vs useful feedback. Most of the
complaint has been caused by people reading old version of the HOWTO.

I've gone close to sending some beg-mail to a notable couple of the
linux distributors to make sure the last thing they get a copy of is the
HOWTO files. Better in my opinion to have the documentation more up to date
than the code. At least for the end user anyway.

Terry




