On Dec 19, 2007 7:17 PM, Ted Pollari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
> Understood -- I have been tangentially following the TG project over > the last 6-9 months, but I still maintain that for a newer user, the > documentation, as-is, is somewhat confusing and the initial reply to > what I took as a very reasonable question, given the state of the news > and documentation came off as thinly veiled criticality of the > original poster for not being up to date on all of the latest TG > news. I apologize if this was not the intent, but it certainly did > come across that way to me. This is the reason why I answered in this thread. To cool down the conversation :) Written communication between non-native speakers can be quite deceptive. I think the _thinly_ veiled criticism was due to the tone of the original poster than was quite... demanding. Sometimes when you ask questions in an open source project in a commanding manner you need to be prepared for the answers that inevitably follow. This said, your comments are important and we must take the positive side of them to improve what we can. > While I am incredibly thankful for the work the TG contributors have > done, I feel that having inaccurate documentation and news, scattered > across multiple locations is far far worse than not having any > information at all. Agreed. Chris Arndt is really working hard on this, and this is a hard job. I must admit this is a two-fold problem. - First the docs are lagging behind and we are trying to improve them on a constant basis with the help of contributors like Ben Sizer and other who give us helpful insight on how they perceive things we sometimes don't see ourselves. - Second the communication on where the 1.0 and 1.1 branches are going as been quite feeble (to say the least) and this is my own fault. I'll need to amend my ways. I promise I'll try to find time on new year's eve to communicate more on the planning, the milestones and the planned features. > And, given that, it's perfectly reasonable to see how a 6 month old > ticket would spur questions such as were asked -- especially if one > was a new-ish user of the project -- and it's very very frustrating > for me given the priority that is placed on documentation in the > project philosophy statement. Once again, agreed. CP2 vs CP3 is more a communication problem on my part than a real flaw in the docs though. > That having been said, I really do want to close with thanking you and > everyone else for your work on this project -- they are appreciated > and I don't want to make it sound like I'm not respecting that. Your comments are always welcome. If you spot anything that could be improved in the documentation or anywhere else, please just tell us here or create a ticket and we'll handle this. The best solution would be for you to register a login/password on the wiki (asking Chris Arndt for this, because we have to fight against spam badly) and begin fixing small things or reporting errors in the docs list: http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-docs/ We love to receive contributions and guidances about the docs or the code. Best regards, Florent. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
