DUG Review

[Jason Taylor]

Meh, there is always going to be bias, people use one thing more than
another they are more prone to document on it. Granted as a whole we
should try and avoid tunnel vision on a particular software package(s)
but it is bound to happen to a degree and these docs are still, even
after publication as I understand it, living documents. So we fine tune
what we have and plan additions etc. and move on just like anything
else.. :)

-Jason

On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 05:17 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > http://distrocenter.linux.com/article.pl?sid=07/03/13/1919208
> > 
> > Contributors to the DUG:
> > 
> > 1. Read.
> > 2. Cry/wail/gnash teeth.
> > 3. Ingest.
> > 4. Discuss.
> > 5. Fix.
> 
> Want a more spicy "review"?
> 
> http://beranger.org/index.php?article=2452
> 
> Rahul
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20070320/c028b0cc/attachment.sig>