Petko Yotov wrote:
This is turning into a flame, so I'll briefly repeat what I said.
On Monday 13 July 2009 17:37:21 Ed W wrote:
If the original links work in the default installation, I don't see this
as an "issue" that should be "fixed". :-)
I don't really see why not?
Because it works exactly as expected, it is not an issue.
I fail to understand why you are digging your heels in over this?
Someone has changed 95% of the documentation ALREADY so that it's now
"resistant" to changes in the server settings. I suggest that *I* would
like to continue that set of changes (I am offering to improve the
documentation) and suddenly everyone starts saying that they want to
*deliberately* keep things broken.
What are you guys smoking?
Fine someone else can work on the documentation - you have made it clear
you don't want my help improving it
I see the benefit of being able to use varied URL construction functions,
for administrators who are aware that it may break existing links and who
decide to deal with it because they want/need it, and it is worth it. :-)
...
...Thanks for that... I love extra work for the hell of it
As I said, admins who are aware of the consequences, who change it because
they want it/need it and because it is worth it for them.
If a case like this upsets/saddens me so much, it is not worth it for me.
You guys like to argue black is white don't you?
OK, I propose (as a thought exercise) that we never fix any of the
existing documentation or update it to clarify anything ever again!
My argument is that it's easier to leave everything as it is and users
can fix their own local copy of the documentation if they want it to be
correct. Fuck that this requires every admin in the whole world to fix
this stuff if they care and that they can't easily keep in sync with the
main project. From now on just post some notes about a new feature in
the mailing list and everyone can update their own local copy of the
documentation with the details. Leaving everything as is will require
less typing (that's what someone argued on a different email...)
This makes about as much sense as you are proposing...
Right well fuck it. I was offering to fix a whole bunch of the
documentation and improve it's quality. Forget about
"$MakePageNamePatterns" this is a red herring and just something you
would get for free from improving the docs as they stand today. Keep
the docs inconsistent on how you spell everything since clearly you
think it's a feature to spell things three different ways!
I just completely fail to understand why you are arguing that it's sane
and useful to write this on one page:
One principle of the [[PmWikiPhilosophy]]
And this on another page:
One principle of the [[PmWiki Philosophy]]
I will leave it here with my final comment that I believe you should
pick *one* of the above and stick with it everywhere (which is what
someone has already done throughout most of the documentation - only the
odd inconsistency still exists). I cannot believe it's the master plan
to get the documentation 95% consistent and deliberately leave the
remainder inconsistent - bully for you if so
Byee
Ed W
_______________________________________________
pmwiki-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
