From: Ullrich von Bassewitz (uz_at_musoftware.de)
Date: 2002-10-25 23:40:05
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 03:15:38PM -0400, Greg King wrote:
> That info definitely should go into the FAQ!
Ok, done.
> I think that "readme.1st" is like "announce.txt": it needs to be very "visible"
> and easy-to-find -- at the "top" of the directory-tree. It tells people that
> there is useful information in the doc/ directory (we shouldn't need to know
> where to look, in order to find out where to look :-).
The information currently contained in readme.1st is most important for
DOS/Windows users. Linux users that have one of the binary RPMs installed can
completely ignore the information in this file. For this reason, I don't think
that readme.1st is as important as announce.txt.
And, I do assume that a user who is not able to recognize a doc/ directory as
source of valuable information will get lots of other problems soon. The doc/
subdirectory *is* located in the top level directory, so it is as visible as
the proposed readme.1st in the top directory.
Regards
Uz
--
Ullrich von Bassewitz uz_at_musoftware.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2002-10-25 23:41:12 CEST