On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 06:59:52PM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote: > On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 06:50:40PM CET, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > In fact, I'm tempted to submit a patch that just assigns a chapter > > number to everything under Documentation/, slaps a single table of > > contents on the front, and calls the result "the git user's manual." > > > > Of course, the moment people started trying to read the thing they'd > > complain that it was a mess--some stuff referenced without being > > introduced, other stuff introduced too many times. But then over time > > maybe that'd force us to mold it into some sort of logical sequence. > > Sequencing isn't the only problem. A _manual_ is different from > _reference documentation_ in that it does not usually describe command > after command, but rather concept after concept. So instead of slamming > git-*-pack commands together, you have a section "Handling Packs" where > you try to coherently describe the commands together. > > Your approach is fine for something you would call "Git Reference > Manual", but it is something really different from "The Git Book" or > "Git User's Manual". Yeah, of course, but I wasn't actually thinking of the man pages so much as: everyday.txt tutorial.txt tutorial-2.txt core-tutorial.txt howto/ hooks.txt README glossary.txt etc. --b. - To unsubscribe from this list: 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