Martin Aspeli wrote:
Israel Saeta Pérez wrote:
I don't mind who actually identifies documentation that would need to
be updated, if the PLIP submitter or the Framework Team, but I'm
convinced every new feature or change should be reflected into the
existing documentation, which is IMO as important as code and
If we don't document new features as we introduce them, we will end up
with obsolete documentation, as is already happening. If we don't like
raising the bar for submitting PLIPs, at least we should commit to
(really) introduce documentation in the release checklist:
I'm sure the Documentation Team will be happy to collaborate with the
Framework Team to get things done timely.
I am not convinced that the Documentation Team at this point has enough
structure (both in terms of the actual corpus of documentation, and the
team itself) to facilitate this kind of process. There's been some very
encouraging movements on the doc list in the last few weeks, but like
Raphael, I'd be worried about this clogging up a process that's already
stretching the current team.
I do agree that documentation should be part of PLIPs. One simple thing
would be to just have a free-text on the PLIP that identifies the
documentation that is either required or extant for the PLIP, so that
people who look at the PLIP later can find a pointer to where there's
However, I think it's too much to ask at this point that the framework
team or PLIP authors go through all existing documentation looking for
things that may be outdated.
I agree that the current structure of plone docs makes it too hard to
find docs that need changing.
A ooncise manual of the api would be more manageable though right?
I'd suggest waiting for that.
Framework-Team mailing list