As someone who has worked on Django's docs a lot, I've considered pitching in to help update the Django Book. However, I'm not sure it's really the best use of time as there's a lot of overlap between Django's docs and the book. Unless someone wants to argue otherwise, I suggest we adapt any portions of the book that are suitable for the official docs and incorporate them.
Regarding the possibility of doing this as a GSoC project, I can't find a reference at the moment, but my recollection is that projects need to involve mostly code, not documentation, so unless that's incorrect I don't think this would be a suitable project for that. On Sunday, February 23, 2014 5:26:52 PM UTC-5, Josh Smeaton wrote: > > Would increasing the scope of the django tutorial itself and deprecating > the djangobook solve the issue of new users learning django? > > - The tutorial does a really great job of introducing the basics. > > - Online resources for learning django have improved, significantly, since > 0.96. Although it can be difficult to find an up-to-date and correct > reference. > > - 2 scoops of django handles the more difficult/advanced concepts really > well. > > - Without someone managing the djangobook alongside django itself, there > are going to be times where the book will contain out of date material. > > Problems: > > - Maintaining an increased scope of the django tutorial would be > difficult. As Daniel mentioned, there are no tests for prose. I've heard > other core devs speaking about the complexities of keeping the tutorial > current. > > - Identifying areas for increased scope would have to be done really > carefully. What do users have trouble understanding? If it's something like > deployment, which methods would be "blessed", and is that appropriate for a > "learn django" tutorial or is that more appropriate for an operations guide > of some sort? > > It's impossible to cover everything in a tutorial/book format without > investing significant time and resources as Daniel Greenfield mentioned. > This is the domain of authors and publishers traditionally, and 2-scoops is > currently filling that role. I don't see how a GSoC project would fix the > situation. Even if the participant was able to bring the djangobook into > line with 1.6 or 1.7, who would take over and keep it current after that? > > Cheers > > Josh > > > On Sunday, 23 February 2014 04:31:16 UTC+11, Devashish Badlani wrote: >> >> Sir, >> >> >> Sample projects with the updated Django 1.6.2,use of latest modules in >> each of them and an helpful documentaion ,would certainly enhance the value >> of DjangoBook is what I feel >> >> Regards, >> Devashish Badlani >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/9b4d84f8-ca85-40b9-8281-0e02eeeeae2d%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
