sorry , i promise my last post :-)

On 24 May 2014 19:02, Steve Johnson <steve@steveasleep.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014, at 09:26 AM, Marcelo Huerta wrote:
> 5 days ago Steve Johnson wrote:
> > I am a friendly developer who recently crossed the threshold from "I
> > wish docutils was better" to "I want to help improve docutils."
>
> AFAICS there are a couple of things which are requested in terms of
> functionality of docutils. What is your progress in this regard?

As I have said a few times now, the git fork is functional, and I'm
experimenting with a new docs site which I will make public for review
when it's worth seeing.

this might be a point to discuss before, david has an opinion,
gunther has worked on sphinx documentation
i am curios about your ideas concerning, what is good and what is bad
in the documentation, and you wont be bitten.
 
I'm also trying to become more familiar with the
code, being a relative newcomer.

david is responding slower these days, but he does and he is great !

8< SNIP
 
And I could just fork the entire project and call it StevesDocutils, why
the heck not? Because it's better to just improve the core project and
the site everyone finds on Google when they search for 'docutils'.

i too think that the forks are no help for users, because which one to use
 
[seriously, why is improving the docs such a terrible idea?]


it isnt it is a great idea, even if it is only a try.
but the discussion is stuck on "i can not edit files versioned in svn"
not on "you should not improve the documentation"
 
8< SNIP

git-svn is okay, but it's kind of a kludge, as you might imagine. And
svn isn't really a git "backend" in that it doesn't offer many of the
benefits like rich tagging and branching.
[or not having to keep updating the committers list,

everyone can commit ? my heart bleeds !
i happily put anyone on the list, and usually in one day.
 
etc, and being on a more popular source code host]

if popularity would be an issue we would use msword, wouldnt we.
 
8< SNIP
 
> In addition I'm interested on how you are going to beam that GIT
> knowledge into my head.

It's just not that hard, and you might actually enjoy it.

i really do not understand the whole git thing.

vcs is a tool, like a shovel for garden work.
it might be nice to have a new shiny one, but i am in it for the digging and dirt and growing plants.
and wait the tool similar to my shovel is the editor
the vcs is more like the thing that holds the shovel
it is nice to have a shiny shovel holder, but this never ever makes sense, never ever.


> To summarize: I feel you want to force something down our throat. If
> you really want to help docutils you could use your energy for
> something real.

To summarize: I think you are trying to turn a rational discussion into
a shouting match, and misrepresenting or ignoring people in the process.
[In hindsight this snipe was not really necessary. But I do think it's
weird
to claim that improving the docs or getting more contributors isn't
"something real."]


again, no one objects to improving the docs, which might then get more developers
and maybe sometime it will be git, maybe github, maybe a devbranch on git and
a stable on sf, .. i do not know, this way we never will

bye