From: Micah Y. <yo...@ho...> - 2001-11-16 09:24:17
|
Not to critisize, but more documentation for Slash would be great. Better yet, I think we (the users of Slash) should be doing it. Let the paid folks keep coding. :-) This needn't be hard. When we go through the code and figure something out, just write it down somewhere. An organized repository would be nice. I may be able to set something up. The good thing is that the Slash code is fairly easy to read. (Thanks guys!) It should include readable discussions of the code, explaining the APIs, how to write plugins, all the troubleshooting tips we can come up with. That sort of stuff. Any thoughts? -- Like to travel? http://TravTalk.org Micah Yoder Internet Development http://yoderdev.com |
From: Bruno P. <br...@po...> - 2001-11-16 11:55:07
|
On Fri 16-Nov-2001 at 01:24:14AM -0500, Micah Yoder wrote: > Not to critisize, but more documentation for Slash would be great. > > Better yet, I think we (the users of Slash) should be doing it. > This needn't be hard. When we go through the code and figure > something out, just write it down somewhere. An organized repository > would be nice. I may be able to set something up. Myself, I would be happy to see material like that posted here where I can find it. It would push the signal:noise ratio in the right direction and slashcode-general isn't very busy anyway. -- Bruno |
From: Eric D. <eri...@ja...> - 2001-11-16 13:47:49
|
Yes yes! A repository for slash documentation would be great! Micah Yoder wrote: >Not to critisize, but more documentation for Slash would be great. > >Better yet, I think we (the users of Slash) should be doing it. Let the paid >folks keep coding. :-) > >This needn't be hard. When we go through the code and figure something out, >just write it down somewhere. An organized repository would be nice. I may >be able to set something up. > >The good thing is that the Slash code is fairly easy to read. (Thanks guys!) > >It should include readable discussions of the code, explaining the APIs, how >to write plugins, all the troubleshooting tips we can come up with. That >sort of stuff. > >Any thoughts? > |
From: Rob \CmdrTaco\ M. <ma...@sl...> - 2001-11-16 13:56:15
|
On Friday 16 November 2001 01:24 am, Micah Yoder wrote: > Not to critisize, but more documentation for Slash would be great. > > Better yet, I think we (the users of Slash) should be doing it. Let the > paid folks keep coding. :-) Hazah! |
From: Chris N. <pu...@po...> - 2001-11-16 21:41:09
|
At 01:24 -0500 2001.11.16, Micah Yoder wrote: >Not to critisize, but more documentation for Slash would be great. Yep. >Better yet, I think we (the users of Slash) should be doing it. Let the paid >folks keep coding. :-) Yep. >This needn't be hard. When we go through the code and figure something out, >just write it down somewhere. An organized repository would be nice. I may >be able to set something up. What I would like to see first is an outline of the documentation. An outline for the API would be fairly easy. An outline for user/admin docs would be a lot harder. But it would make compiling and extending the documentation you're collecting a lot easier. >It should include readable discussions of the code, explaining the APIs, how >to write plugins, all the troubleshooting tips we can come up with. That >sort of stuff. There is a Slash book coming out, from O'Reilly. I don't know the due date, but it is in production. It is short on API, but long on many other things, and includes how to write plugins, etc. I'd recommend that if you really want to do this, start with the API, then when the book comes out, have the user/admin/troubleshooting docs extend what the book doesn't already have. My three cents, -- Chris Nandor pu...@po... http://pudge.net/ Open Source Development Network pu...@os... http://osdn.com/ |
From: Micah Y. <yo...@ho...> - 2001-11-20 09:32:11
|
On Friday 16 November 2001 04:40 pm, Chris Nandor wrote: > What I would like to see first is an outline of the documentation. An > outline for the API would be fairly easy. An outline for user/admin docs > would be a lot harder. But it would make compiling and extending the > documentation you're collecting a lot easier. Maybe it would be worth getting on IRC sometime to discuss an outline. Not now though, too busy... :-) > There is a Slash book coming out, from O'Reilly. I don't know the due Ooooh! I'd kill for an O'Reilly Slash book! Heck, I might even go out and buy one! :-) > date, but it is in production. It is short on API, but long on many other > things, and includes how to write plugins, etc. I'd recommend that if you > really want to do this, start with the API, then when the book comes out, Seems like API would be one of the most important things. It's not too hard to figure out what things do from the code, but a pocket reference would be great. > have the user/admin/troubleshooting docs extend what the book doesn't > already have. Will the book be available online under a Free Documentation License? If not, there's still work to do in that department. Not necessarily as thorough as the book, but SOMETHING... -- Like to travel? http://TravTalk.org Micah Yoder Internet Development http://yoderdev.com |
From: Chris N. <pu...@po...> - 2001-11-20 13:05:06
|
At 01:32 -0500 2001.11.20, Micah Yoder wrote: >> have the user/admin/troubleshooting docs extend what the book doesn't >> already have. > >Will the book be available online under a Free Documentation License? If >not, there's still work to do in that department. Not necessarily as >thorough as the book, but SOMETHING... I don't think it will be, but I don't know. I agree that it is still good to have free documentation, but my perspective -- and surely that of many others -- is that we just want to get everything documented somehow and somewhere, so the stuff in the book would necessarily take a lower priority (except for the most important things, like installation, etc.). After covering the holes left by the book (most esp. the API). -- Chris Nandor pu...@po... http://pudge.net/ Open Source Development Network pu...@os... http://osdn.com/ |