On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 21:43:15 +0100, Melvin Ram wrote: > I would highly recommend using that format for the > tutorials/documentation for rails.
Meh.. I'm not that impressed. For one thing, "Ubuntu LTS" is a designation, not a version. I have Ubuntu LTS on my server - it's Dapper. Which LTS are they talking about? For another, why is the main menu off to the right instead of in front of my face? I'm not saying it's awful, I'm just saying it's not an archetype. The problem with *any* technical documentation is that every single reader has a different level of expertise. As you said, you "had no clue of how to do anything in Linux before this". If I had to read through that level of detail to set up Rails, I'd scream. OTOH, writing multiple versions means there's more information you have to keep in sync as Rails changes - and more work, in general. Also, geeks suck at seeing things from the viewpoint of anyone less experienced than they are. A good writer can balance all that out. So can a good editorial system (e.g. better wiki software, which we're working on, for some value of "we" and "working" and "on"). -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn't like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
