[ntp:questions] Re: NT binaries for ntp-4.2.0

Harlan Stenn stenn at maccarony.ntp.org
Fri Oct 31 06:18:51 UTC 2003


In article <3F9756D9.D76B8715 at udel.edu>, David L. Mills <mills at udel.edu> wrote:
>David,
>
>The issue is recovering old documentation about old software versions,
>right?

I'm more interested in making the documentation for as many versions of
NTP easily available.

>However bad that documentation may be, we don't get to change it
>now.

Actually, we can allow it.  I'm not saying Dave Mills would change it,
but if there is a typo or any other error, we certainly have the *ability*
to allow it to be fixed.

I expect that the onlyh places this "fixed" documentation would be visible
would be the ntp documentation website.

>If I take your point seriously, modern shrinkware groupies will
>find no reason to extract that old stuff anyway, so why are we debating
>it?

The reason to make the documentation for older versions of NTP available
is to make it as easy as possible for people to look up information they
need.

>You misunderstand the purpose of the documentation from here. It is
>intended for reference, record and archive purposes and is probably too
>abstract for shrinkware groupies. I describe how the dang things works
>in engineering terms, reveal the options and features and the principles
>behind the design. If I didn't do that, who else would? There are other
>projects, such as the faq and twitchy designed to bring comfort from
>this babble and I cheer that.

Yes, and I (and everybody else, I expect) applaud your efforts to maintain
the technical documentation.

I want to make it easy for people (mostly sysadmins) to be able to easily
find the information they need to support their systems.  There are a large
number of reasons why they may be unable to upgrade to the latest software,
and there are also a number of reasons why they may not have the
documentation that came with their installation handy.

H



More information about the questions mailing list