Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-tomcat-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 15713 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jul 2001 16:26:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 15610 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 16:26:04 -0000 Message-ID: <3B4B2C24.9020704@stinky.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:24:04 -0700 From: Alex Chaffee Reply-To: alex@jguru.com Organization: jGuru / Purple Technology User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux 2.4.5 i686; en-US; rv:0.9.1) Gecko/20010608 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Subject: Re: [DOC] Vote on oustanding doc issues? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N Rob S. wrote: >>I like this compromise. I will propose that we get rid of the 3.2 docs >>on the site -- once I'm convinced they're similar enough. There's still >>that old "3.3 is a rogue release" sentiment floating around, and people >>might not appreciate giving 3.3 implied legitimacy by making it the >>"official" documentation... >> > > Woah, I thought the committers worked that out a long time ago. I was off the list for a while. I tried to read through the archives but all the vitriol gave me a headache. Did they just agree to disagree? Do you think there'll be a problem with proposing to remove the 3.2 docs from the site? -- Alex Chaffee mailto:alex@jguru.com jGuru - Java News and FAQs http://www.jguru.com/alex/ Creator of Gamelan http://www.gamelan.com/ Founder of Purple Technology http://www.purpletech.com/ Curator of Stinky Art Collective http://www.stinky.com/