couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Newson <rnew...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Couchdb Wiki] Trivial Update of "CouchDB_in_the_wild" by wentforgold
Date Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:51:28 GMT
+1 for docs in the same place as the code. One of the main reasons is
that a single commit adds the feature, the tests that confirm the
feature works, and the doc changes that let folks know about it. It's
just sane.

And -1 on keeping them floating around externally and sucking them in
somehow at release time.

B.

On 14 June 2011 17:48, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 14 Jun 2011, at 18:45, Jens Rantil wrote:
>
>> Just throwing in my 2 cents in this discussion.
>>
>> On Jun 14, 2011, at 6:13 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>
>> /doc
>> /doc/docbook
>> /doc/docbook/root.xml
>> /doc/docbook/ch1.xml
>> /doc/docbook/ch2.xml
>> /doc/docbook/ch3.xml
>> /doc/Makefile.am
>>
>> You get the idea. The Makefile.am would contain a bunch of rules that would allow
us to convert this DocBook into plain text, DocBook, man, info, LaTeX, PostScript, and PDF
as needed. All very straight forward.
>>
>> Is really writing documentation XML the best we can come up with? How about using
'pandoc' (http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/) to write documentation in restructuredText, markdown
or textile instead? They are all way easier to read and write for newcomers.
>
> They are also not capable of structuring documentation exhaustively. I hate XML as much
as the next guy, but MC's doc system is really slick and not as bad once the basic infrastructure
is in place (I'll show it soon, promised).
>
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message