incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Clarifying facts
Date Wed, 14 Mar 2012 03:14:02 GMT
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com> wrote:
>
> On 14 Mar 2012, at 02:36, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> Let's see if anyone else thinks this is too verbose.  Remember, FAQ's
>> are not intended to be read as an article, one after another.
>> Typically they are things we we link to and point users to for
>> specific questions.
>
> Since you have essentially eliminated my contributions and replaced them with something
different, I'll withdraw from this activity until the partisan style you've chosen changes.
A pity as we genuinely had some collaboration sparking between unlike minds.
>

I'm sorry you think it is partisan for new FAQ's to adopt the style of
existing ones.  In school we had a different word for this.  We called
it "editing".  It would probably have been worth the effort to check
the existing FAQ's before spending four hours of your evening writing
in a contrasting style. Fortunately I was able to clean it up into a
uniform style, add supplemental information, useful links for the
reader, etc.

In any case, your edits are not holy writ, and neither are mine.   If
there was a presumption against bold editing, then that presumption
was in error.  So let's have someone else take a pass, e.g., not you
and not me,  and see if they can improve it even further.

And if your "client" has a specific question that you think is still
not answered on the wiki, then please speak up.

-Rob

> As an added bonus you'll not have to worry about any edit locks :-)
>
> S.

Mime
View raw message