On Mar 29, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Patrick Strasser wrote: > > Moreover googling is no alternative to proper documentation. > I'd like to contribute examples that I found to the grub docs, but the > manual gives no hint how to do so... ;-)
GRUB Legacy documentation is a severe mind bender. It is made up for by users posting solutions in various locations. Learning GRUB took me more effort than it should have given its limited scope and I attribute it entirely to incoherent documentation. And GRUB2 documentation is vastly worse, made all the more problematic by massive architectural changes in GRUB2. Personally I find this to demonstrate a total lack of discipline and leadership that a hammer was not laid down by someone to say, effectively, "thou shalt not add in new features or change things, unless you are willing to document them in some coherent manner." Only GRUB developers understand this now. It's an insider's job. It's simply not possible for willing 3rd party technical writers (I am one) to come in and sort through the train wreck. > It's the developers task and skill to document features. I agree, but from this outsider's perspective, it's abundantly clear the developers have totally abdicated on this. And the consequences are unsurprising. Users are complaining, even though they should not have to really interact with GRUB if it is working correctly. But more importantly it has totally fractured support among distributions. Those developers looked at GRUB and found the documentation to be so hideous, and the changes so non-obvious and non-trivial that many (maybe most) have decided not to implement. It is not due to laziness that Red Hat continues to hack GRUB Legacy, even for EFI support. Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
