> > So far we should invent it. > And I totally agree with you. If people do not see the good doc they > will not write good comment. > I started to work on DrDoc a kind of package meta data to add > documentation to a package but it got stole > I should push that again. What would be nice is to take one package > and do it well as an example. > > It think it should be possible to write documentation at the package level. So developpers have a place where they can write an overview of their package. When we click on a package, documentation should be displayed by default or easily.
In the rubygems world, it is a common practice to write documentation in a README file which is displayed by RDoc on startup page (github works the same way). It seems to me that there's the same level of comment between Ruby class/methods and Pharo. The documentation at the package level may be the difference. Python has a real documentation effort.Each release come with its up to date documentation. It's a release criteria. Python shares some similarities with Pharo as they both have "batteries included". May be there should have a process to contribute to a centralized Pharo documentation which can be accessed within the IDE. Laurent.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
