But needing some help, we're here =) _____________________________________________ *Gilson Filho* *Web Developer http://gilsondev.com*
2011/4/27 Massimo Di Pierro <[email protected]> > I do not have definitive answers. > > I will try review the book annually, usually in August. When I do this > is the process: > - I diff the online book with the printed book > - I go over the logs to see which features are undocumented and need > documenting > - If I add documentation then it becomes a stable backward compatible > feature (*) > - I publish the new book > > (*) it is a bit of a chicken and egg issue. It is stable if I feel it > is useful and general enough based on my expectation, actual usage and > discussions on the mailing lists. There is no formula for making this > decision. If you feel something needs improvement you can always raise > up the issue on the mailing list and that will prevent the feature to > become stable. > > Massimo > > > On Apr 27, 8:09 am, villas <[email protected]> wrote: > > It is tricky for book editors to write new sections for the book for > > various reasons: > > e.g. > > > > - Editors do not usually know the full background and intent of new > > features. > > > > - As new features are always introduced as unstable, it is too early > > to document them. Typically there are relevant group postings > > (sometimes split between the two groups), but these are easily > > fragmented and lost. > > > > - Once features are documented in the book, Massimo tends to consider > > them eligible for backward-compatibility. Therefore that decision is > > very important and is beyond the scope of an editor and can only be > > made by a core developer. > > > > We do need to agree a new work-flow. Here are a couple of questions > > to move the discussion forward a little: > > > > 1. Does Massimo intend to review, overhaul and re-issue a new edition > > of the book annually? > > > > 2. Perhaps we could add sections to the book (e.g. in a different > > color) which are clearly identified as unstable/experimental? Or > > perhaps, the wiki idea (by VP) is better for that? > > > > 3. Can Massimo introduce some way of informing when a feature is > > considered stable and therefore ready for formal inclusion in the > > book? > > > > Thanks, D >
