SPAM-LOW: RE: [OpenAFS] Documetation for asetkey and aklog

Esther Filderman Esther Filderman <>
Fri, 8 Jul 2005 14:31:16 -0400

On 7/8/05, Ken Hornstein <> wrote:
> This illustrates _exactly_ my feelings about documentation formats.
> Basically, I don't give a shit about 90% of the worthless crap that
> these systems do (yeah, I'm going to be writing a WHOLE LOT of theorems
> in the Kerberos FAQ); what I want is a simple layout that looks
> reasonable in text and in HTML, and I want to learn the minimum
> necessary to accomplish that.  I have my HTML reference, and I remember
> enough of the HTML tags that doing the FAQ in HTML isn't too bad.  I
> don't even have enough time to write the information that goes in the
> FAQ (you know, the USEFUL stuff); there's NO WAY I'm going to learn
> DocBook, POD, Latex, XML, TeXinfo, or whatever the latest exciting
> new documentation format is when HTML is sufficient for my needs.

If I had my way, we'd  be doing straight HTML for documentation and
[whatever Russ wants] for Man pages. However, since I was apparently
sick when a "decision" was made to go to LaTex, I missed out on having
an opinion.

I've been yelled at by a small, vocal pile of people that "we have to
make pretty documents."  I keep yelling back that "pretty" is damned
useless if people can't update it.

If DocBook takes me more than 15 minutes to figure out, it's going out
the window.  Really.  I don't know LaTex either, and looking at it
makes my eyes bleed.

Really, this whole "documentation project" has become a thorn in my
side.  I'm doing what I can with a bunch of people all screaming, "NO!
Do it MY WAY!"  It's supposed to be "my" decision on what we do but
everytime I state my "decision" I the screaming starts again.

Today's Rant is brought to you by the letters C, S, and P.  Put them
in order and you spell, "I need a new job."