Talk:Rolling Your Own Bootloader: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
(Re: fixup) |
(Re) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:# move all remaining theory to bootloader and keep all practical info here in a separate article. |
:# move all remaining theory to bootloader and keep all practical info here in a separate article. |
||
:My choice would be either option 2 or 3, largely depending on wether keeping two articles is useful. One could add some extra information to the practical aspects, at which point #3 becomes the better one. At the very least we should compare the articles and see what information is missing from either one. - [[User:Combuster|Combuster]] 06:25, 5 July 2007 (CDT) |
:My choice would be either option 2 or 3, largely depending on wether keeping two articles is useful. One could add some extra information to the practical aspects, at which point #3 becomes the better one. At the very least we should compare the articles and see what information is missing from either one. - [[User:Combuster|Combuster]] 06:25, 5 July 2007 (CDT) |
||
:: I think that I like 3 better. Moving of this information would just clutter up the theory article. This one is more of a how-to anyways. --[[User:Frank|Frank]] 15:36, 5 July 2007 (CDT) |
|||
Revision as of 20:36, 5 July 2007
Are we keeping this page and fixing it up or are we going to move its contents to somewhere else? It would be nice to know before I go and fix it up. Thanks. --Frank 09:46, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
- I already rewrote parts of the article a while before this version was moved in with the fast merge. The main difference is that the other article is more theoretical but lacks some information that was present. I think we should decide here which way to go:
- fix this article and remove Bootloader
- copy the remaining information to Bootloader and remove this article
- move all remaining theory to bootloader and keep all practical info here in a separate article.
- My choice would be either option 2 or 3, largely depending on wether keeping two articles is useful. One could add some extra information to the practical aspects, at which point #3 becomes the better one. At the very least we should compare the articles and see what information is missing from either one. - Combuster 06:25, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
- I think that I like 3 better. Moving of this information would just clutter up the theory article. This one is more of a how-to anyways. --Frank 15:36, 5 July 2007 (CDT)