On Dec 3, 2012, at 01:26 , Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Alexander. > > Jan, I see what you're saying. But the purpose of the docs is to highlight > key information for end users. Just like we don't complain about > duplicating logic in the docs (consider the "just read the code" argument) > I don't think we should complain about duplicating change history. But > obviously, only when it is useful for end users. Who, let's face it, are > not going to go poking around in Git to find out when some attribute or > argument was changed. And if we do expect users to do this sort of thing, > why bother with the docs at all?
I didn’t suggest to remove that information from the docs or that people have to “poke around in git” (this really isn’t as bad as you make it sound, btw), just that we track this information in a system designed to do that as an artefact of us doing the changes, rather than doing it by had. We can extract the relevant information out of git and splice them into the final display version of the docs. Cheers Jan -- > > > > On 2 December 2012 22:07, Alexander Shorin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Why did you remove the change history? It seems useful. >> >> So was decided on one of meetings to track changes since 1.3 version, >> may be 1.2, not deeper: >> http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Meeting20121010#Doc_Versions >> >> -- >> ,,,^..^,,, >> > > > > -- > NS
