Suggested paragraph change in Chapter 4 just before figure 4.3.

[C. Michael Pilato]

On 05/24/2011 03:02 PM, Brown, NeilX D wrote:
> It would be accurate as well as less confusing to phrase this more along the lines of
> 'has to copy every file and subdirectory within the working copy you have checked
> out on your local disk'.

I made a similar tweak in r3881, further tightening up the scope of that
comment to just the copied directory in the working copy (not even the whole
working copy).

> Also, could you please, please, put a _lot_ more work into the index?  It is way too short,
> way too incomplete, and makes no effort to distinguish between "definition", "substantive
> discussion", and "references in passing".  Accordingly I often can not find an item in the
> index, when I do the discussion I am looking for isn't even listed, or I have to go thru 8
> references where 7 are as trivial as mentioning the item in passing in a list of things.  All
> 3 of these drawbacks lead to frustration, delay, and often to confusion ("What was I
> looking for again?").

The index is a total wasteland.  O'Reilly provided indexing services for the
published form of the book, but none of that work made it back into the open
source codebase.  What's present now is mostly just my poking around in
DocBook XML's support for index stuffs and is *in no way* meant to be
consider exhaustive.  More like, "exhausting".

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato at red-bean.com> | http://cmpilato.blogspot.com/