----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas G. Willis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pylons-discuss" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 7:17:52 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: How did you begin your fun with Pylons?
On May 22, 10:37 am, Mikeroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey guys, > I'm wondering where did you start your journey with Pylons? I'm asking > this questions because of the low number of tutorials, sh*tty > tutorials on Pylons site.... maybe there's a big boom about 0.9.7? > Honestly - I don't think so... If I remember good - it should be on > more than a month ago. > > W8ing for your reply, > Mike > First time poster here on this list.... > I actually chose pylons for a project because of the documentation > actually. In a perfect world, i suppose the docs would describe > exactly how to build the project I want to build but, I think the docs > are pretty good nonetheless. I think one of the challenges with Pylons > and Turbogears from the documentation angle is that they incorporate > 3rd party libraries so the author likely has to constantly walk that > fence of describing the pylon specific things without going too much > into re-documenting someone else's library. How much should you cover > in a pylons document about SqlAlchemy when SqlAlchemy has more than > adequate documentation already? At least from the documentation I've > seen, links are provided where applicable to those other library > references. Unfortunately the quality of documentation differs > significantly on those other libraries. I think it is too much to ask > for pylons doc authors to take up the slack on that though. This is an interesting point. It might make sense to start a documentation standard. One that all these projects could embrace moving forward. If the docs were all in a standard format, like "man", they could be easily combined for projects like Pylons and other frameworks, sort of Legos for documentation. "Open Doc Blocks" ... ;) Something like this would help reduce redundancy, sort of normalization of docs, and might improve overall documentation support on a lot of projects Just a thought... does anyone know if there is any sort of standard like this? I tend to use Natural Docs for its easy skinning and support for it's multi-language and multi-doc syntax support. But this would only cover API docs... - Kevin Baker --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
