I think your $.02 is worth a buck Mark. On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 06:27 +0900, Marc Wiriadisastra wrote: >>SNIP<< > > I would think that would be a package issue. If the bug is located with > the documentation provided by the package then surely it would be a > package issue. > > My $0.02 As a programmer I have been known to: A) write my own doc (your $.02 applies) B) Cut-n-paste from doc material of others (your $.02 raised .02) C) Link to a ref or help doc (not done as part of my issue) And there may be other options at play on the fedora teams. Like maybe this belongs to the klam (clam) team and not to fedora at all? As an observer to the Fedora Doc project, my vision is not good enough to see how these issues get pushed around from team-to-team for resolution. Perhaps that is my greatest shortcoming? I very much like the way Fedora has brought applications together into a cohesive package. As part of acting responsibly I have a need to submit to the most appropriate group to save shuffling it around before the root source is identified. Unless of course it doesn't make any difference where I submit -- the shuffle process is so effective it gets to the root with minimal effort and in quick time? I'm going to use your two cents and take this issue to the most direct point of observation -- the kde desktop klamav application. If Fedora project engineered the klamav-to-evolution interface, then maybe Fedora will get it back again from the KDE/klamav folks? In any case - thanks for your $.02. Let's see what happens... And also let's let this play out before we build more mountain over the top of the mole hill? > > Marc > Warmest regards from here, George -- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
