> > Over time, of course, we will continue to add new
> > material as we see fit, for now at least we are out
> > of emergancy mode.

> Still, I think it is not a bad idea to organize things 
> differently. I do realize there might be too little people 
> to appoint a maintainer for every part or chapter of the 
> guide, but there might be good ways to keep the guide
> up to date all the time. 

Eventually this is likely how it will go, just not
right now.

> Submitting a diff for every spelling
> or writing mistake is simply too much work. Wouldn't it
> be a good idea to create an off-site CVS tree and give 
> people actively involved with the guide commit access?

I do not particularly like the idea of maintaining a 
seperate CVS server just for the Guide.

> Then somebody with netbsd.org cvs access could commit
> the "stable" parts in the NetBSD CVS.

Right now I have not had a problem getting changes in.
Sometimes it takes up to 2-3 days but it is not like 
_not_ having a change in is going to break the system
or anything.

Like I have said before though, if the Guide grows
to a point where my coordinating updates becomes unwieldy,
I will certainly begin doling out chapters or even entire
subject matter to other people. 

I do realize right now it appears that I am one level deep
for coordinating content updates, I will see if I can coerce some other
developers into assissting me for when I am on holiday or
otherwise disposed.

	j