From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-08-12 13:53:01
|
Hi all, As said in another email, I'm roughly 75% through updating the Quick Start Guide to include the Firebird 1.5 info. However, this leads to all kinds of nested forks of the type: If you use Firebird 1.0.x, then - If you're on Win9x/Me, do this; - On Win NT/2000/XP, do the other thing; If you use Firebird 1.5.x, then - On Win9x/Me, do the mambo; - On Win NT/2000/XP, do the samba; I think this makes the document way too complicated, *especially* for the new users who are its main target audience. So unless there are serious objections I'll make two QSGs: one for 1.0.x, the other for 1.5.x, and create separate branches for them in the CVS tree. For me this is hardly more work than what I'm doing now, and for both readers and future doc maintainers it's a lot more convenient. Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |
From: Phil S. <ph...@sh...> - 2004-08-12 14:15:29
|
Paul Vinkenoog wrote: Hi, > I think this makes the document way too complicated, especially for > the new users who are its main target audience. So unless there are > serious objections I'll make two QSGs: one for 1.0.x, the other for > 1.5.x Would new users be using 1.0.x? The only reason I can think of using 1.0.x over 1.5 is if you already have it in production, and can't upgrade. Phil -- Firdbird has my support, has it yours? www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation Find a better way of life, play Marbles - www.marillion.com ICQ:760757 | AIM:pjshrimpton | Y!:pjshrimpton | pjs...@ja... |
From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-08-12 14:28:10
|
Hi Phil, >> I think this makes the document way too complicated, especially for >> the new users who are its main target audience. So unless there are >> serious objections I'll make two QSGs: one for 1.0.x, the other for >> 1.5.x > Would new users be using 1.0.x? The only reason I can think of > using 1.0.x over 1.5 is if you already have it in production, and > can't upgrade. I guess new users would (and should) go for 1.5. But if I don't split the QSG, they will find it pretty complicated at places, and they already have a lot to learn. Of course I could also just drop all the 1.0.x info and don't bother, but that would be throwing away the effort and information that has gone into that version. It's fairly easy to duplicate the doc and weed out the 1.0 stuff from one copy and the 1.5 stuff from the other. Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |
From: Phil S. <li...@sh...> - 2004-08-12 15:54:02
|
Paul Vinkenoog wrote: Hi, > > Would new users be using 1.0.x? The only reason I can think of > > using 1.0.x over 1.5 is if you already have it in production, and > > can't upgrade. > > I guess new users would (and should) go for 1.5. But if I don't split > the QSG, they will find it pretty complicated at places, and they > already have a lot to learn. I am not saying you should not split them, just with limited time and resources it may be better to concentrate on 1.5 first as that is what most, if not all, new users will need. > It's fairly > easy to duplicate the doc and weed out the 1.0 stuff from one copy and > the 1.5 stuff from the other. In that case, go for it <g> Phil -- Firdbird has my support, has it yours? www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation Find a better way of life, play Marbles - www.marillion.com ICQ:760757 | AIM:pjshrimpton | Y!:pjshrimpton | pjs...@ja... |
From: Lester C. <le...@ls...> - 2004-08-12 16:21:33
|
Paul Vinkenoog wrote: > As said in another email, I'm roughly 75% through updating the Quick > Start Guide to include the Firebird 1.5 info. However, this leads to > all kinds of nested forks of the type: > > If you use Firebird 1.0.x, then > - If you're on Win9x/Me, do this; > - On Win NT/2000/XP, do the other thing; > If you use Firebird 1.5.x, then > - On Win9x/Me, do the mambo; > - On Win NT/2000/XP, do the samba; > > I think this makes the document way too complicated, *especially* for > the new users who are its main target audience. So unless there are > serious objections I'll make two QSGs: one for 1.0.x, the other for > 1.5.x, and create separate branches for them in the CVS tree. For me > this is hardly more work than what I'm doing now, and for both readers > and future doc maintainers it's a lot more convenient. Should have read further :) That is the sort of thing I was trying to explain in the other post ;) Add the Linux stuff to it, and versions of Linux Bring in JDBC and PHP. The CONTENT needs to be more directed, rather than trying to produce a one size fits all book. Which is what I was trying to get at with the demo 'Using Guide' :) -- Lester Caine ----------------------------- L.S.Caine Electronic Services |
From: Lester C. <le...@ls...> - 2004-08-12 22:23:56
|
Paul Vinkenoog wrote: > As said in another email, I'm roughly 75% through updating the Quick > Start Guide to include the Firebird 1.5 info. However, this leads to > all kinds of nested forks of the type: > > If you use Firebird 1.0.x, then > - If you're on Win9x/Me, do this; > - On Win NT/2000/XP, do the other thing; > If you use Firebird 1.5.x, then > - On Win9x/Me, do the mambo; > - On Win NT/2000/XP, do the samba; > > I think this makes the document way too complicated, *especially* for > the new users who are its main target audience. So unless there are > serious objections I'll make two QSGs: one for 1.0.x, the other for > 1.5.x, and create separate branches for them in the CVS tree. For me > this is hardly more work than what I'm doing now, and for both readers > and future doc maintainers it's a lot more convenient. Should have read further :) That is the sort of thing I was trying to explain in the other post ;) Add the Linux stuff to it, and versions of Linux Bring in JDBC and PHP. The CONTENT needs to be more directed, rather than trying to produce a one size fits all book. Which is what I was trying to get at with the demo 'Using Guide' :) -- Lester Caine ----------------------------- L.S.Caine Electronic Services |
From: Phil S. <li...@sh...> - 2004-08-12 14:12:03
|
Paul Vinkenoog wrote: Hi, > I think this makes the document way too complicated, especially for > the new users who are its main target audience. So unless there are > serious objections I'll make two QSGs: one for 1.0.x, the other for > 1.5.x Would new users be using 1.0.x? The only reason I can think of using 1.0.x over 1.5 is if you already have it in production, and can't upgrade. Phil -- Firdbird has my support, has it yours? www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation Find a better way of life, play Marbles - www.marillion.com ICQ:760757 | AIM:pjshrimpton | Y!:pjshrimpton | pjs...@ja... |