Re: I *don't* want Paul's style guide.

[Randy Terbush <ra...@zyzzyva.com>]

Paul sez:
> In reply to Robert S. Thau who said
> > 
> > I also note with displeasure that you are now referring to your
> > "KNF"-based style drafts as "the current doc", even though there is no
> > consensus in the group on the use of a style guide based on that
> > document, and so it is *not* current Apache policy.  If, in the
> > future, you could refer to these things as "my KNF-based style
> > drafts", or some such locution which doesn't seem to give them a
> > quasi-official status which they do not possess, that would helpfully
> > clarify matters.
> 
> This is just plain silly,...

I agree completely. I see no reason that this document can't exist
in parallel to Ben's tally and be revised as we get more of this
set in stone. I don't think it was intended to be final. It's a
good working example.