Re: Documentation requirements: Re: lynx-dev LYNXCFG:, LYNXCOMPILEOPTS:

[T.E.Dickey]

> 
> From: Philip Webb <address@hidden> 
> 991119 Klaus Weide wrote:  
> >>PW> a good point, provided it is documented somewhere, 
> >>PW> but it isn't: not in Users Guide or Supported URLs. 
> >KW> let the inventor of LYNXCFG: do it... :) 
> PW>yes, if we all accept that authors of features & their modifications 
> PW>should be required to document them (allowing for language difficulties), 
> PW>but i hesitate to ask TD to take on the task of doing the requiring. 
>  
> Tom, I won't hesitate to at least _ask_ your opinion - what do you 
> think about the idea that before a new or changed feature is accepted 
> requiring the contributor also provide documentation? 

given that it would be a radical change in policy, I don't think it would 
work out.

> Larry W. Virden                 <URL: mailto:address@hidden> 

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey