On Wed, 3 May 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:
Dear diary, on Wed, May 03, 2006 at 09:21:54PM CEST, I got a letter
where David Lang <dlang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said that...
On Wed, 3 May 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:
As to content, we could I think use material found at Wikipedia Git page,
and on External Links in Wikipedia Git_(software) article, not repeating of
course what is in official Git Documentation/
please go ahead and put a lot of the info that is in the GIT
Documentation/ on the wiki. it's far easier to go to one site and browse
around to find things then to run into issues where you have to go
somewhere else (with different tools) to find the info.
even if you just put all the documentation files there, as-is (as text
files even, no hyperlinks in them) they should still be there.
Then who will keep it in sync (BOTH ways)? That would be quite a lot of
work, I think.
That said, having the documentation in a wiki is not a bad idea per se,
but you need to keep things consistent and converging. And I believe
(and hope) that killing Documentation/ directory is no option - I hate
it when documentation of software I installed just tells me "look at
this URI" (which documents a different version anyway, and it's all very
useful when I'm sitting in a train with my notebook).
I agree with this completely.
as for keeping it in sync, the ideal situation would be for a
documentation manager to take that job ;-) but lacking that just put the
documentation in a non-editable page somewhere and link to it from the
wiki (this could even be pages at kernel.org or wherever you have the raw
source available outside of git itself)
David Lang
--
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
-- C.A.R. Hoare
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html