On Nov 22, 2004, at 6:37 AM, Stas Bekman wrote:
Really? I for one believe that the docs would be of better overall quality if they were maintained at the same time as the rest of the tree. On smaller-scale CPAN modules, I've found that insisting that contributors provide patches for all three of code, tests and docs results in a vastly more useable distribution.
They are maintained at the same time. but since we chose to have modperl-docs include modperl1, modperl2 and other general online docs, I call the whole unrelated (since only a chunk of it relates to each of the software projects).
This is why I suggest that they not be called "docs", since they're not documentation distributed for each release. They're really docs for the mod_perl site. Perhaps site-docs? Then it makes much more sense to maintain them separately from mod_perl1.x or mod_perl2.x.
It doesn't make any difference to me how this module is called. I'm used to 'docs', but any other name will do. The good thing about keeping 'docs' is having it consistent with the mailing list name.
-- __________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
