On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 02:37:46PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
write documentation or don't understand the API. Wrong API docs are surely
worse than not having no docs, aren't they?
snip
If I thought putting it in policy would significantly improve the
availability of API docs in Debian, I
[Neil Williams]
I chose Debian as a development platform for my own reasons and my
decision was not deemed to be wise in the eyes of some of my
upstream colleagues. As the newbie to that particular team, I was
under significant pressure to upgrade to Fedora or SuSE.
Are you saying Fedora and
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 09:23:03AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
docs, but I'm convinced it will be quantitatively small). My approach
to this is first to decide whether API docs in the policy is something
we want in debian or not. Then, if it is the case, to state it in the
policy. Then
On 29-Apr-07, 03:10 (CDT), Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Neil Williams]
I chose Debian as a development platform for my own reasons and my
decision was not deemed to be wise in the eyes of some of my
upstream colleagues. As the newbie to that particular team, I was
under
Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's all true, but it fails to convince me that is better not to state
this in the policy than to state it (only Steve's point about wrong API
docs, but I'm convinced it will be quantitatively small). My approach
to this is first to decide
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 04:23:38PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 08:12:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
If we are talking about hand-written documentation you're of course
right. However if you're talking about documentation which can be
generated
Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fair enough, but note that having man pages is actually addressed by the
policy. Why do you think API doc shouldn't? After all man pages are docs
for users and API doc are too, with the only difference that in the
latter case the users are
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 08:12:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
If we are talking about hand-written documentation you're of course
right. However if you're talking about documentation which can be
generated automatically from sources (and not that it was the ideal
point of Neil) than
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 04:27:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On 23-Apr-07, 15:51 (CDT), Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that all libraries - without exception - must come with some
API documentation and the docs should be as complete and as accurate
as possible -
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:32:46 -0400
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
I chose Debian as a development platform for my own reasons and my
decision was not deemed to be wise in the eyes of some of my
upstream colleagues. As the newbie to that particular team, I was
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:13:18AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 04:27:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On 23-Apr-07, 15:51 (CDT), Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that all libraries - without exception - must come with some
API
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:39:26 +0100
Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After reading the responses so far, the -doc element of my original
idea needs modification.
I'd like to see all library source packages having a minimum of 4
binary packages required by Policy: the SONAME, the -dev,
On 23-Apr-07, 15:51 (CDT), Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that all libraries - without exception - must come with some
API documentation and the docs should be as complete and as accurate
as possible - ideally generated from the source itself.
That's not a Debian issue. All we
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:15:02 -0500
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23-Apr-07, 15:51 (CDT), Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that all libraries - without exception - must come with some
API documentation and the docs should be as complete and as accurate
as
Neil Williams wrote:
Would these changes need a GR?
Why would a policy change need a GR? How could a GR possibly be the best
way to choose a sound technical policy?
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 12:00:59AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:15:02 -0500
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23-Apr-07, 15:51 (CDT), Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that all libraries - without exception - must come with some
API
Neil Williams wrote:
I chose Debian as a development platform for my own reasons and my
decision was not deemed to be wise in the eyes of some of my upstream
colleagues. As the newbie to that particular team, I was under
significant pressure to upgrade to Fedora or SuSE. Debian needs to
Neil Williams wrote:
snip
There is a distinct lack of man (3) and coordinated documentation for
libraries in Debian. True, some poorly documented packages include test
programs or examples somewhere under /usr/share/doc/ but it isn't
simple to track these down.
Is it unreasonable to expect
18 matches
Mail list logo
