On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 09:26 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: > On 01/06/2014 08:13 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 08:01 +0100, Lars E. Pettersson wrote: > >> On 01/06/2014 12:46 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > ... > >>> If it exists for backward compatibility, it doesn't necessarily need to > >>> be documented. > >> > >> Ehh? Why? Could you elaborate? > > > > I don't see what needs elaborating. I'm not aware that the 11th > > commandment is "Every Subcommand Must Be Documented, Even Ones You Just > > Put In So People Still Using Syntax From The Old Tool You're Replacing > > Won't Have A Problem". If that's the only reason a synonym of a > > documented subcommand exists, what's the point of documenting it? Anyone > > who needs it doesn't need documentation to find it - that's the *point*, > > if they were going to read the documentation, they'd know the *new* > > subcommand - and anyone who reads the documentation doesn't stand to > > gain anything from learning that a subcommand has a synonym for > > backwards compatibility purposes. So, why go to the trouble? > > The reason for me asking was that you accused me of "excoriating the dnf > devs" (a rather harsh accusation) just because I did not try > erase/remove. I looked at the documentation and used auto completion. > Why would I try a number of different sub-commands if they were not > documented? Because you're suggesting that they no longer exist? Making sure the thing you claim no longer exists *actually no longer exists* seems like a pre-requisite of making such a claim. > If a thing is not documented, it does not exist. No, I think you're confused. If it's not documented, it's not documented. If it doesn't exist, it doesn't exist. Two different conditions, see. One related to existence. One to documentation. ;) > The first rule of > documenting. If it exist, but is mot documented, there's a fault in the > documentation. Even if the sub-commands are there for backward > compatibility, they need to be documented for people to find them. Um. No. No they don't. I've been running 'dnf remove' for weeks. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
