Vicky Larmour <vicky@jifvik.org> writes:
>
> At 01:19 24/04/01 +0200, Henk P. Penning wrote:
> > -- stop a faq that has not been changed for a year; send warnings
> > monthly to the maintainer; kill the faq after 18 months, or
> > something like that.
>
> All sounded pretty reasonable apart from the above item, I thought. I'm
> sure there are FAQs which contain legitimate and still valid information
> but have not been updated for a year.
I don't think that's reasonable at all considering that the wait for
moderator approval is about six months now - it's unrealistic to try
to define what the waiting period _might_ be after an unspecified
upgrade.
Also, I thought I heard a call for a "Perl Wonk." I think I sent
the reply to the wrong address, so apologies if I'm repeating myself.
I think I qualify as much as anyone around here, but I'm seriously
occupied at the moment - I'm working on the second edition of "Teach
Yourself Perl in 21 Days," published by Sams. I'd be happy to lend a
hand, time permitting, however.
-- Robert Kiesling Linux FAQ Maintainer rkiesling@mainmatter.com http://www.mainmatter.com/linux-faq/toc.html http://www.mainmatter.com/ --- Tired of spam? Please forward messages to uce@ftc.gov.************************************************************* To unsubscribe send a message to majordomo@faqs.org as
unsubscribe faq-maintainers fill-in-your-email-address-here *************************************************************
[
FAQ Archive |
Search FAQ Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet References
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997-2000
All rights reserved