forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: level of detail for docs (Was: svn commit: r437136)
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2006 01:54:36 GMT
Gav.... wrote:
> From: David Crossley
> > 
> > Why do we need this level of detail? 
> I was following the level of detail in other examples on the page and
> elsewhere on the site.

I meant that the SVN Book has all the information,
so why do we need to duplicate it.

> Surely the "SVN Book"
> > explains it better than we can.
> >
> Yes that link was referred to in the emails linked to from the Forrest
> Issue. In the same email thread Ross mentioned he asked how it should
> Be done and apparently no one knew.
> It also states that Antonio stated that the svnbook docs were unclear
> In this regard. (Hence my attempt to forrest-ify it and make it clearer
> To forrest devs)
> > If not, then wouldn't it be better to submit a patch to that project.
> I have the time to dedicate to Forrest but none for redbean I'm afraid.
> > Sorry if i appear to be jumping on your changes. I am trying
> > to use your early contributions to provide guidance.
> No problem, thanks, hope my comments here don't make for excuses, 
> Just trying to justify my commit :) (And partly why I'm picking
> Easy ones first as Im sure you noticed)
> > My concerns are that the Forrest Project should not need
> > to maintain such documentation and rather concentrate on
> > Forrest topics. Our time gets wasted. 
> I agree, but the Issue asked for it.
> For example, i detect
> > some obscurities in what you wrote.
> Well, I tried to Forrest-ify it to be relevant, what is unclear ?

That misses my point. I would prefer not to spend time
attending to it. A simple link to SVN Book avoids that.

> > Also the "tips for developers" document is becoming bloated.
> Ok, the Issue mentioned this as a (perhaps) place to add it to.
> > Also ASF Committers should know how to do this stuff
> > or at least know to refer to the SVN Book.
> They should, I am confused now though, why was the Issue to add
> This stuff created in the first place?

As a reminder to refer people to SVN Book for
the background and the many uses of 'svn merge'.

> So now whats the plan, do you want me to truncate the info somewhat to
> Maybe one short example?

If it was me doing it, then i would put a simple
dot-point about making sure that the dev knows what
they are doing and link direct to the SVN Book section
which has full background info. They need to understand
any associated issues.

If svnbook section is unclear (note that i don't know
what Antonio is referring to) then add a simple entry
to the svnbook issue tracker, and link to that issue from
our docs.


View raw message