If I'm reading your offer correctly, Jason, it sounds like you're proposing that: 1. You find the places in the documentation that aren't what a typical user will be looking for. 2. You would then ask the developers to clarify those sections to you (hopefully in a slightly less antagonistic fashion than above, but whatever). 3. You would convert the (presumably still somewhat jargon laden) responses into proper technical writing, and post it in the wiki.
Yes, that's the plan. I've posted a request for issues with the current documentation. I want to put up a set of things that people commonly want ALSA to do, along with simple instructions. I'll also do a more complete review of the asound.conf information.
If this is what you're proposing, I think it would probably be a big help to the ALSA team. Of course, some things (like ttable vs. transfer_table) may turn out to be not documentation issues, and so be prepared that not everything will come out exactly as you are hoping.
It shouldn't be too difficult to change the config file format. We don't have to get rid of the old keywords, we just need to make them aliases for the new keywords. Personally, I think "ttable" definitely needs to go. Table is somewhat descriptive, if you already understand the context. "T" is pretty much useless. :-)
Again, I'm new here, and may be out of line, but it sounds like what you're offering is a pretty good deal.
I'm glad to do it. As I stated earlier, I want ALSA and Linux to kick some serious butt. We need explorers to cut through the brush and weeds, making it easier for those who come after.
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Alsa-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-user
