Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PDF Documentation

2006-06-09 Thread Joshua Slive
On 6/9/06, Joost de Heer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joshua Slive wrote: > On 6/9/06, Joost de Heer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Is there a specific reason why the 2.2 (or 2.0.58) documentation isn't >> distributed in PDF format anymore? > > Because it takes a chunk of time to genera

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PDF Documentation

2006-06-09 Thread Joost de Heer
Joshua Slive wrote: > On 6/9/06, Joost de Heer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Is there a specific reason why the 2.2 (or 2.0.58) documentation isn't >> distributed in PDF format anymore? > > Because it takes a chunk of time to generate the pdf file and nobody > has gotten around to it.

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PDF Documentation

2006-06-09 Thread Joshua Slive
On 6/9/06, Joost de Heer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, Is there a specific reason why the 2.2 (or 2.0.58) documentation isn't distributed in PDF format anymore? Because it takes a chunk of time to generate the pdf file and nobody has gotten around to it. The difference between the docs fo

RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PDF Documentation

2006-06-09 Thread Boyle Owen
> -Original Message- > From: Joost de Heer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 10:33 AM > To: users@httpd.apache.org > Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PDF Documentation > > Hello, > > Is there a specific reason why the 2.2 (or 2.0.58) documenta

[EMAIL PROTECTED] PDF Documentation

2006-06-09 Thread Joost de Heer
Hello, Is there a specific reason why the 2.2 (or 2.0.58) documentation isn't distributed in PDF format anymore? Joost - The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. See http://httpd.apache.org/use