From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7657 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2007 21:32:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 7649 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jul 2007 21:31:59 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:31:57 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AA65982CE for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:31:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0373982C6 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:31:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I8jmr-0001i7-SR for gdb@sourceware.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:31:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:32:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB in C++ Message-ID: <20070711213153.GA3615@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sourceware.org References: <00b601c7bda5$a5e6fa60$0a0a0a0a@DELORIAN> <1184183253.5515.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <18069.13868.365370.13474@pkoning-laptop.equallogic.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00104.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 01:41:11PM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote: > I wouldn't object to moving the internals documentation there. > High-level organization is pretty key to effective documentation, > though, so the wiki would need aggressive gardening. It would > probably be good for it to have an appointed editor, to avoid ending > up with two or three competing theories for the overall organization. For the record, I would object. I think the internals manual is fine where it is, and would be no more likely to be expanded and kept up to date if it were moved. I think the wiki is best taken advantage of as a tool for collecting new information, which can then be added to the internals manual through the normal review process. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery