On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 01:00 +0200, Emiliano Heyns wrote:
> I appreciate the extra info, but not so much the implication that I'm
> hard to deal with.

I didn't get the impression that anyone said that.

Ove already responded well to this email, so let me just add my own
perspective: I also agree that documentation could be improved. My hope
is that someone will come along who is willing and capable of improving
it, so each time someone shows up and starts asking questions, I try to
support that by answering as well as I can.

I've tried once to come up with a complete description. I'll keep
refining that as specific shortcomings get pointed out, but I have
neither the time nor the motivation to start from scratch again. I also
doubt that the second attempt would be much better. It is notoriously
hard to write good documentation, in particular when you know something
inside out, because then it can be hard to see where the stumbling
blocks might be for others.

On the other hand, documentation written by bad technical writers is not
necessarily better. If they don't understand something, you end up with
text saying "option foo does foo" without really explaining anything.

There must be some middle ground...

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.



_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.syncevolution.org/mailman/listinfo/syncevolution

Reply via email to