Re: LYNX-DEV Year 2000 Compliance

[T.E.Dickey]

> > Perhaps it would be a good idea to add a small file (Y2K.doc) to the current
> 
> I would vote in favor of not adding more clutter to the distribution.
> People who would be asking such a question are not going to bother
> downloading the distribution, unpacking it and then reading through
> all the docs to find out about it.  A statement on lynx.browser.org
> might be somewhat effective.
they certainly won't read the change-log.
 
> Since the new release seems to be beginning to materialize, I would like
> at this time to ask that the first paragraph of the top level README
> file be put back in.  (Klaus removed it because it was premature.)  I
> think it is important to make a statement, however unofficial, that
> the release is "official."
ok (I'll check against 2.7.1, which I assume has the text)
 
> At the same time the "Year 2000 Comliance" question could be answered
> in the README file.  It could be one sentence stating that it is compliant,
> perhaps with a reference to one of Fote's posts on the subject, e.g.,
>    "URL: http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/month0997/msg00615.html";.
I think perhaps a link on that (cluttered ;-) introductory page in the
help screen would work (though I'm not sure if there's room).
 
> __Henry
> 


-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey