[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

Well, the topic went to documentation very quickly. I think we've all decided that documentation in the source code generally shouldn't be messed with. To exend the statement, we have decided that we should make our directions to new users clearer. If that's all you read, then we should

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

I'm neither a developer (except indirectly, I suppose, via fixes to Maxima) nor a Sage user nor, for that matter, a fan of Python. (I don't object to it, just don't use it). Nevertheless, I'll throw my $0.02 in here. Why not have a top-level menu that leads to introduction to Sage for high

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

+1 Rosenkilde. If the tutorials really are different from each other, then they should be to the point when introducing which one to read. I also outlined my specific idea for www.sagemath.org in my second post. +1 King. Though it isn't "removing documentation", it is pointing users to 1) how

[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

Hi Johan, On 2017-02-06, Johan S H Rosenkilde wrote: > Under the Documentation main page doc.sagemath.org, the "guided tour" is > called "tutorial". And it is listed after "Thematic Tutorial" though it > should surely be visited first by a newcomer. And shouldn't it rather

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

> Exactly. I wouldn't like to have documentation that is *not* included in the > SageMath sources. Currently, one can access all documentation locally, during > a > SageMath session. +1 Most of the Feature Tour pages http://www.sagemath.org/tour.html are not in the source tree. They are also

[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

Hi! On 2017-02-06, Clemens Heuberger wrote: > Am 2017-02-05 um 03:22 schrieb kcrisman: >> >> "Tutorial", "Thematic Tutorial", "PREP Tutorial", "A Tour of Sage". and >> "Constructions" are mostly the same Tutorial. >> >> >> Just for clarification, these are

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

Am 2017-02-05 um 03:22 schrieb kcrisman: > > "Tutorial", "Thematic Tutorial", "PREP Tutorial", "A Tour of Sage". and > "Constructions" are mostly the same Tutorial. > > > Just for clarification, these are massively and completely different > documents. > There is also a lot of

[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

On Sunday, February 5, 2017 at 1:57:33 AM UTC, Matthew Rennekamp wrote: > > I have no problem doing this, but I'm left to assume that > https://github.com/sagemath/documentation >

[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

I have no problem doing this, but I'm left to assume that https://github.com/sagemath/documentation is the only way that I can edit it. Otherwise, this post is simply "asking for permission" to do so. On Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 8:22:20 PM UTC-5, kcrisman wrote: > > > "Tutorial", "Thematic

[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

> "Tutorial", "Thematic Tutorial", "PREP Tutorial", "A Tour of Sage". and > "Constructions" are mostly the same Tutorial. > Just for clarification, these are massively and completely different documents. There is also a lot of overlap, but the audiences are very different. The challenge

[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

> Why not? Although I'd agree that a to-do list should better be a metaticket on Trac, and discussions should happen on sage-devel or sage-combinat-devel. The wiki is hard to track down for pages if one doesn't know what to look for. So, for prospective contributors, it's hard to see if a

[sage-devel] Re: Organisation of online : survey of developers

Hi Matthew, On 2017-02-03, Matthew Rennekamp wrote: > So, first would be the wiki. Since it is a Wiki, it is editable by anyone- > though it should *not contain to-do lists/discussions* like it has. Why not? Although I'd agree that a to-do list should better be a