| 1 |
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 07:08:32AM -0400, Lisa Seelye wrote: |
| 2 |
> What is wrong with documenting inside the eclass or other file? |
| 3 |
> </devil's advocate> |
| 4 |
- Unneeded bloat in the portage tree (and load on the rsync |
| 5 |
mirrors) |
| 6 |
- A documentation by the author is good, but can be done almost |
| 7 |
as well by someone who did understand the code. There are |
| 8 |
simply more people being able to contribute to a wiki/CMS and |
| 9 |
since documentation is far less critical than code that is |
| 10 |
part of portage securitywise. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
It should be clear that this approach wont generate shiny, |
| 13 |
perfect docs, but any doc is better than no doc. However, once |
| 14 |
docs have settled, they could get GuideXMLed to be shiny, perfect |
| 15 |
docs. This might actually be an argument _for_ a wiki and |
| 16 |
against a better structured CMS - high expectations (layoutwise) |
| 17 |
might scare away people who just found out about a nice trick |
| 18 |
and want to share it. OTOH im pretty ignorant about todays |
| 19 |
CMS.... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Implementaion aside, some other question: Is this idea worth a |
| 22 |
GLEP? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Yours, Björn |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Björn Michaelsen |
| 30 |
pub 1024D/C9E5A256 2003-01-21 Björn Michaelsen <bmichaelsen@×××.de> |
| 31 |
Key fingerprint = D649 8C78 1CB1 23CF 5CCF CA1A C1B5 BBEC C9E5 A256 |
Archives