On Aug 26, 2007, at 4:16 PM, Gavin Henry wrote:
> Update of /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/openldap-guide
> Modified Files:
> preamble.sdf 1.90 -> 1.91
> Log Message:
> Don't comment on software produced by others. Those who desire to
> use a
> network analyzer are likely to know which ones are or are not
Understood, but how far does that go?
Well, this instance I saw going over too far because it was basically
it stated an opinion regarding the quality of a piece of software.
It made a specific recommendation when no specific recommendation is
needed. Even if there were a need for the admin to use a network
analyzer, there is no particular reason for OpenLDAP Project to favor
one analyzer over another.
Does that mean we can't talk about "tail", as it
"wasn't made here"?
There are multiple implementations of tail(1) specification. The
guide should using non-standard features of some implementations.
Stick to POSIX whenever possible.
Also, I assume we're not stating any opinion as to the quality of any
particular implementation of tail(1).
It's a debugging section so I think referencing Open Source tools
Avoid playing favorites. If there are more than one tool that can do
a job (which is generally the case), don't pick one. Instead,
describe the job that needs getting done and leave it to the admin to
decide which tool to use.
My 2 pence.
> CVS Web URLs:
> Changes are generally available on cvs.openldap.org
> within 30 minutes of being committed.