On 3/7/06, Brian K. Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I agree that it would be nice to have the 'latest and greatest' > docs on the main site, I don't believe having them as the only > documentation is a good idea at all. The documentation should be able to > evolve after a release to make them better,
After it's tagged and rolled, it's done. The docs for that release (as in 1.0beta3) aren't going to change. Anything that gets added or fixed belongs to the next release. The situation now is that if an error in the plugin docs is found, it stays on the site until the next release happens. > but having documentation > online that applies to "trunk" code and not released code tends to > equate "bad documentation" (the docs say I can do X. "oh, that's in the > trunk, use a snapshot"). So it's better to never even know that X was possible? Meanwhile the user thinks Maven is missing features and constructs a workaround, or gives up. If the version number showed up on the plugin docs (it used to...) and the documentation said "since x.x" on new features, I'm pretty sure people could figure it out. I don't understand why visible new features and "use a snapshot" equates to bad documentation. I don't want to sit around perfecting the documentation for the *last* release, I want to keep moving forward with the latest bits. -- Wendy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
