Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-15 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:06:39AM -0800, John Wiegley wrote: > To be fair, it's not really Google Docs that enabled it, but Martin's amazing > capacity for going into detail in this design space. I credit him as a human > being, and not the technology, for why beancount is so well and thoroughly

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-15 Thread John Wiegley
> Jacques Gagnon writes: > Finally a project with proper design spec, documentation and feedback loop. > While gdocs isn't the nicest platform for reading, I'm happy it enabled this > amount of information to exist in the first place. To be fair, it's not really Google

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-15 Thread Zack Williams
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Martin Blais wrote: > Not "will", but "has". I'm not reporting a hypothetical from the future, I'm > reporting actual, lived experience from the past. Witness it for yourself: > Access any of my docs (e.g. http://furius.ca/beancount/doc/syntax)

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-15 Thread Zack Williams
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 2:50 AM, John Wiegley wrote: > I prefer to have docs maintained under Git, offline accessible, in an open > format that Emacs is able to edit. That could be Markdown, LaTeX, TeXinfo, or > any of the other free formats available. I agree with this -

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-14 Thread Martin Blais
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 4:50 AM, John Wiegley wrote: > > Martin Blais writes: > > > You can write the text in Emacs and import it later on when you > reconnect if > > you're stuck on a flight or a train, as John mentions (how often does > that > >

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-14 Thread Chris Bennett
> I find the reaction from people in the OSS community interestingly puzzling > and somewhat curmudgeonly. [..] > But this is a case where I'm witnessing the OSS community unable to > think outside the box. How apt that this was circling a few days ago: http://taskwarrior.org/docs/advice.html

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-14 Thread Jacques Gagnon
I guess to each his own priority. Back in October i was debating between starting using either Ledger or Hledger. Somehow come across Beancount in the process and when I saw the all docs i was sold to it. Finally a project with proper design spec, documentation and feedback loop. While gdocs

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-14 Thread John Wiegley
> Martin Blais writes: > You can write the text in Emacs and import it later on when you reconnect if > you're stuck on a flight or a train, as John mentions (how often does that > happen anyway?). "How often does that happen anyway?" Often. What's comfortable for your use

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-13 Thread Dominik Aumayr
Whups, it seems I poked a hornet's nest there.- Ideological reasons (Google is evil for [some|many] people in these communities)That's a very difficult argument to make.I didn't want to make an argument (think "opinion") about that, but rather an observation (think "poll") that many OSS developers

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-13 Thread Eric
On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:21:56 -0500, Martin Blais wrote: 8>< > In the meantime you have a inexistant hypothetical "libre" wiki server > which once you get consensus over who will take care of it will require > ongoing maintenance by someone who will stop paying attention

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-13 Thread Manuel Amador (Rudd-O)
On 02/12/2016 11:25 PM, Martin Blais wrote: > That's a very difficult argument to make. It isn't really an argument, just a thing that some people believe. I myself, for example, don't believe that, but I still compartment Google JavaScript to a separate VM. -- Rudd-O

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-13 Thread Vikas Rawal
> > I stopped reading beancount docs after they were removed from the repository. > The idea of collaborative editing in Google Docs is good, but in my case the > implementation isn't usable (for many practical reasons) and the files always > are too „far away“ from me, hidden through apps

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-13 Thread Daniel Clemente
El Sat, 13 Feb 2016 11:49:29 +1100 Ben Finney va escriure: > > Martin Blais writes: > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Dominik Aumayr wrote: > > > > > And I also get why people might want something else […]: > > > > > > - Ideological reasons (Google is

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-12 Thread Martin Blais
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Martin Blais wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Ben Finney > wrote: > >> Martin Blais writes: >> >> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Dominik Aumayr >> wrote: >> > >> >

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-12 Thread Martin Blais
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > Martin Blais writes: > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Dominik Aumayr > wrote: > > > > > And I also get why people might want something else […]: > > > > > > -

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-12 Thread Martin Blais
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Dominik Aumayr wrote: > As a member of the beancount community I can see how Google Docs has huge > benefits in the practical world: > > - WYSIWYG > - Editable by everyone with an account > - Changesets > - Inline-comments > - It feels like a

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-10 Thread Dominik Aumayr
As a member of the beancount community I can see how Google Docs has huge benefits in the practical world: - WYSIWYG - Editable by everyone with an account - Changesets - Inline-comments - It feels like a document, not a website (altough this is not always a benefit) And I also get

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-10 Thread Stefan Tunsch
Why not publish documentation on readthedocs.org? It is a similar solution like github for code, but for documentation. You can include your docs in your code repository written in Markdown or reStructuredText. Readthedocs will pull it and compile it for people to read and search online. On

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-10 Thread John Hendy
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Martin Blais wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:08 AM, John Hendy wrote: >> >> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Martin Blais wrote: >> > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Simon Michael wrote:

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-09 Thread John Wiegley
> Martin Blais writes: > What's wrong with Google Docs? I do not trust it stay around as long as Ledger will, and I wouldn't want to have to scrape and convert all the text once it does disappear. Better to pick an open, enduring format now and stick with it. -- John

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-09 Thread Martin Blais
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 7:55 PM, John Wiegley wrote: > > Martin Blais writes: > > > What's wrong with Google Docs? > > I do not trust it stay around as long as Ledger will, and I wouldn't want > to > have to scrape and convert all the text once it does

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-09 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 08:27:38PM -0500, Martin Blais wrote: > I find the reaction from people in the OSS community interestingly > puzzling and somewhat curmudgeonly. I sort-of understand it in a way: > for many problems, for years, sticking with Linux and simple solutions > has proved superior

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-08 Thread John Hendy
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Simon Michael wrote: > On 2/7/16 9:32 AM, John Hendy wrote: >> Ever tried googling "ledger tutorial"? :) > > Yes (and happily today for me Ledger's manual is the first hit. I might > have got lucky. :) > You're right! That being the case, my

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-08 Thread Martin Blais
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:08 AM, John Hendy wrote: > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Martin Blais wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Simon Michael wrote: > >> > >> We have a lot of docs, in various states of freshness, specific to

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-08 Thread John Hendy
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 12:48 PM, nx wrote: > I always have good luck using "ledger cli" in the search terms. Definitely true for me, but only now that I know it's called that. Had I not been a member of the Org-mode mailing list, I doubt I would *ever* have run into ledger. John

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-08 Thread John Hendy
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Martin Blais wrote: > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Simon Michael wrote: >> >> We have a lot of docs, in various states of freshness, specific to each >> implementation. Also many informative blog and mail list posts. Much of

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread Simon Michael
On 2/7/16 9:32 AM, John Hendy wrote: > Ever tried googling "ledger tutorial"? :) Yes (and happily today for me Ledger's manual is the first hit. I might have got lucky. :) > In any case, my input would be to call this family of things something that > existing users can find, as well as

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread John Hendy
On Feb 7, 2016 10:44 AM, "Simon Michael" wrote: > If you agree, what would you call it ? Martin, since you are retiring > your LedgerHub tool, would that name be available ? > > > Related to naming.. what do we call this whole topic, anyway ? Stefano > used the phrase

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread Craig Earls
If we really wanted to make it easy to find info we could ask john about a name change. "Ledger" is a pretty common word. We should be all millenial and spell it ledjir or something else english-ish. On Sunday, February 7, 2016, Simon Michael wrote: > On 2/7/16 9:32 AM, John

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 08:44:20AM -0800, Simon Michael wrote: > Related to naming.. what do we call this whole topic, anyway ? Stefano > used the phrase "command-line accounting". But we have curses and web > GUIs too. "Plain-text accounting" ? Pretty soon we'll probably support > some non-text

new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread Simon Michael
We have a lot of docs, in various states of freshness, specific to each implementation. Also many informative blog and mail list posts. Much of this is hard to find. Reading Stefano's recent ledger list post, I think, not for the first time, wouldn't it be great if we had all of this linked

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread nx
I always have good luck using "ledger cli" in the search terms. On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 1:31 PM Craig Earls wrote: > If we really wanted to make it easy to find info we could ask john about a > name change. "Ledger" is a pretty common word. We should be all millenial > and

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread Martin Blais
+1 It's like golang for Go On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 1:48 PM, nx wrote: > I always have good luck using "ledger cli" in the search terms. > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 1:31 PM Craig Earls wrote: > >> If we really wanted to make it easy to find info we could ask

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread John Wiegley
> Simon Michael writes: > If so, where would that somewhere be ? ledger-cli.org and/or its wiki is the > closest existing candidate, but it has never felt right to load that up with > non-Ledger stuff. I think it's valuable for each implementation to have its > own distinct

Re: new docs site, anyone ?

2016-02-07 Thread Martin Blais
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Simon Michael wrote: > We have a lot of docs, in various states of freshness, specific to each > implementation. Also many informative blog and mail list posts. Much of > this is hard to find. > Is it? Reading Stefano's recent ledger list