That's right. It is true that it isn't branch-specific information,
and that does cause a little bit of irritation for me too, but neither
is Misc/developers.txt or Misc/maintainers.rst.
Of course, we might consider a separate HG repository (I'm all in favor
of many small repos, instead of a
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 08:40, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
Of course, we might consider a separate HG repository (I'm all in favor
of many small repos, instead of a gigantic sandbox one).
+1.
Cheers,
Dirkjan
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
That's right. It is true that it isn't branch-specific information,
and that does cause a little bit of irritation for me too, but neither
is Misc/developers.txt or Misc/maintainers.rst.
Agreed. I'd rather those were
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:29:51 -0400
Fred Drake fdr...@acm.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
the first thing on the agenda is a complete rewrite of the developer
docs and moving them into the Doc/ directory
I'd like to know why you think
On 23/09/2010 11:11, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:29:51 -0400
Fred Drakefdr...@acm.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Brett Cannonbr...@python.org wrote:
the first thing on the agenda is a complete rewrite of the developer
docs and moving them into the Doc/
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:29:51 -0400
Fred Drake fdr...@acm.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
the first thing on the agenda is a complete rewrite of the developer
docs
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
The practicality argument of being able to edit those docs without
having to master a separate (pydotorg) workflow sounds quite strong to
me.
This is the key point for me. For developer controlled stuff, the
easiest
On Sep 23, 2010, at 08:40 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
That's right. It is true that it isn't branch-specific information,
and that does cause a little bit of irritation for me too, but neither
is Misc/developers.txt or Misc/maintainers.rst.
Of course, we might consider a separate HG repository (I'm
2010/9/23 Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 08:40 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
That's right. It is true that it isn't branch-specific information,
and that does cause a little bit of irritation for me too, but neither
is Misc/developers.txt or Misc/maintainers.rst.
Of course, we
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 08:40 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
That's right. It is true that it isn't branch-specific information,
and that does cause a little bit of irritation for me too, but neither
is Misc/developers.txt or
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:35:02 +1000, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
The practicality argument of being able to edit those docs without
having to master a separate (pydotorg) workflow sounds quite strong to
me.
On 23/09/2010 15:16, R. David Murray wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:35:02 +1000, Nick Coghlanncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Antoine Pitrousolip...@pitrou.net wrote:
The practicality argument of being able to edit those docs without
having to master a separate
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 10:16:01 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:35:02 +1000, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
The practicality argument of being able to edit those docs
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:16 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
I'd *much* rather edit rst files than futz with a web interface when
editing docs. The wiki also somehow feels less official.
There are dvcs-backed wikis, for example:
https://launchpad.net/wikkid
:)
I don't agree that the wiki feels less
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
-1 on wiki; wikis are where good information goes off to die.
Well, *all* documentation requires vigilance to remain relevant and current.
I'm sure you don't think the Python wiki is useless, right? ;)
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP
On Sep 23, 2010, at 09:06 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
Are any of our docs subject to release schedules?
I guess what I'm concerned about is this scenario:
You're a developer who has the source code to Python 3.1. You read the
in-tree docs to get a sense of how our development process works.
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
-1 on wiki; wikis are where good information goes off to die.
Well, *all* documentation requires vigilance to remain relevant and current.
I'm sure you don't think the
Am 23.09.2010 16:33, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:16 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
I'd *much* rather edit rst files than futz with a web interface when
editing docs. The wiki also somehow feels less official.
There are dvcs-backed wikis, for example:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
-1 on wiki; wikis are where good information goes off to die.
Well, *all* documentation requires vigilance to remain relevant and current.
I'm sure you don't think the
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org
wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
-1 on wiki; wikis are where good information goes off to die.
Well, *all* documentation requires vigilance to remain
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Am 23.09.2010 16:33, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:16 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
I'd *much* rather edit rst files than futz with a web interface when
editing docs. The wiki also somehow feels less
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org
wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
-1 on wiki; wikis are where good information goes
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 16:56, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
I want to believe your theory (since I also have a feeling that some
wiki pages feel less trustworthy than others) but my own use of
Wikipedia makes me skeptical that this is all there is -- on many
pages on important
There's no reason it *has* to be useless though. The Moin developer now has
shell access, so if there are technical problems with wiki, like its theme,
performance, or lack of features, we can get those fixed. If it's the content
or organization that needs improvement, then we can recruit
Hello All,
I am new to this list, but I have been lurking around getting a feel for the
environment and processes. I had some discussion yesterday about the
developer documentation as well, since it’s what I do professionally. I am a
technical writer but also work in the web development arena
I have to agree with Jesse. We have too many wiki pages that are so
out of date they're dangerous. They serve a purpose, and I think we
should have a wiki in addition to the official documentation. This
could be aggressively linked from it so people can comment on that
documentation -- a
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 10:41:35 -0400, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 09:06 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
Are any of our docs subject to release schedules?
I guess what I'm concerned about is this scenario:
You're a developer who has the source code to Python 3.1.
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 07:56:19 -0700, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:47 AM, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
This impression comes along with the authority of potential authors.
If only the release manager can write a document, it is very official.
If any
On Sep 23, 2010, at 11:49 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
A separate repository would also be fine, IMO. If someone can find or
write the code to publish that repository to the appropriate location
automatically, we could presumably do this even before the rest of the
hg transition.
I'm not
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
I have to agree with Jesse. We have too many wiki pages that are so
out of date they're dangerous. They serve a purpose, and I think we
should have a wiki in addition to the official documentation. This
could be
Am 23.09.2010 16:35, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
-1 on wiki; wikis are where good information goes off to die.
Well, *all* documentation requires vigilance to remain relevant and current.
I'm sure you don't think the Python wiki is useless, right?
Am 23.09.2010 16:47, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
-1 on wiki; wikis are where good information goes off to die.
Well, *all* documentation requires vigilance to remain relevant
Am 23.09.2010 16:41, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 09:06 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
Are any of our docs subject to release schedules?
I guess what I'm concerned about is this scenario:
You're a developer who has the source code to Python 3.1. You read the
in-tree docs to
If we can recruit a bunch of somebodies who *do* care, then the wiki
would be much more useful. But I still don't want to edit the
dev docs there, if I have a choice :) There's a reason I stopped
updating the wiki as soon as I moved to a code repository.
I think that there are plenty
On 9/23/2010 7:41 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Our development processes are*primarily* independent of Python version, so I
don't think they should be tied to our source tree, and our CPython source
tree at that. I suspect the version-dependent instructions will be minimal
and can be handled by
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 09:05, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 11:49 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
A separate repository would also be fine, IMO. If someone can find or
write the code to publish that repository to the appropriate location
automatically, we could presumably
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 01:50:34 am Steven Elliott Jr wrote:
What I have done in various organizations has been to create a system
where an official repository is kept with all of the *official*
documentation and a way for users (developers) to submit their
proposals as to what they would like to
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 01:42:03 am Martin v. Löwis wrote:
By nature (quick-quick), information is unorganized in a Wiki. This
is what wiki advocates cite as its main feature, and wiki opponents
as its main flaw.
I've never heard wiki advocates say that, and even a cursory glace at
wikis like
Georg Brandl writes:
You should read my tweets more often :)
Now *there* is an innovation that never should have happened!
At least you're bringing up the average quality with every twit I mean
tweet.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
A discussion occurred (w/o me) on #python-dev where moving it to Doc/
would allow it to show up at docs.python.org to perhaps get more
people involved. It also allows developers to contribute to the docs
w/o having to get pydotorg commit rights.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 21:29, Fred Drake
40 matches
Mail list logo
