> > So based on your enthusiasm, I guess you could act as a 
> head of the Ruby
> > documentation project.
> 
> Cool it.  I didn't want to sound that enthusiastic! :)

Well, you sounded like one :). Ok, I'm chilled again.

> Now I notice that the library reference on rubycentral is copyright
> Addison Wesley so guess it can't be used.

We shouldn't be so (too) scared of the evil copyright marks. Their function
is to protect the original author of misuses.

And, well, your point was a little bit wrong too. We can easily use the
reference - I'm doing it almost everyday. It's there on the net because we
wanted and we're willing to make it better by proof-reading and testing it.

We can't rewrite it. As long as there's no need for it, and we can't see any
need to modify it, and they provide off-line version, there's no need to
compete. Duplicated efforts would be wasted.

But as I said, there might be time when we get something good by doing the
work again  from scratch. One (IMO big) reason could be the availability of
the standard library reference for the newbies who can only find the docs
distributed with the normal package (be it sources or win-binaries). But
even for those, we could easily point to fetch the reference from A&W, as
long as they just provide it. I'd guess it won't take long when Dave&Andy
have time to (persuade the A&W staff and) create off-line version :).

	- Aleksi

Ps.

No need to send duplicate for me (and probably not for the rest of the list
either). I've got everything from the list server very fast anyway :).