Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:46:53 +0100
From:      Joel Dahl <joel@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net>
Cc:        Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>, hackers@freebsd.org, Dirk GOUDERS <gouders@et.bocholt.fh-ge.de>
Subject:   Re: My wish list for 6.1
Message-ID:  <1135090013.664.56.camel@dude.automatvapen.se>
In-Reply-To: <20051220142254.GD68989@submonkey.net>
References:  <43A26FFB.9080405@samsco.org> <200512190934.jBJ9YNhX022376@musashi.et.bocholt.fh-gelsenkirchen.de> <20051220142254.GD68989@submonkey.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:22 +0000, Ceri Davies wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 10:34:23AM +0100, Dirk GOUDERS wrote:
> > 
> > > 3.  Full review and update of the install docs, handbook, FAQ, etc. 
> > > There are sections that are embarrassingly out of date (one section of
> > > the handbook apparently states that we only support a single brand of
> > > wifi cards).  A co-worker of mine tried to install 6.0 using just the
> > > handbook install guide, and discovered that it really doesn't match
> > > reality anymore, in both big and small ways.  Contact me directly if
> > > you would like his list of comments.
> > 
> > I am wondering if it wouldn't be advantageous to have "versioned"
> > documents that just cover one specific release and not to cover all
> > realeases in single documents.
> > 
> > I could imagine that it is harder to cover everything in single
> > documents than to perhaps copy the existing documentation when a new
> > branch is created and edit it to match just the new release.
> > 
> > Maybe, I do not realize how much more work this would be but it would
> > probably enforce regular reviews of the documentation and the readers
> > would benefit from it.
> 
> This is exactly the idea that I have been pimping to anyone who will
> listen for the last three months or so.  I also think that it is
> advantageous for users who are using, say 4.2, to be able to find
> documentation for 4.2 without having to interpret a nest of "if you have
> 4.x do this, if 5.0 through 5.3 do that, else do the other".  I don't
> think it's a lot of work to just branch the handbook (and FAQ
> if we decide to keep it) - in fact, for me, it would be a definite win -
> at release time, but it just doesn't seem to be what other people want
> done.

Yep, I really like this.  The current mess is impossible to maintain
(and also impossible to read).  Yesterday I tried to update the kernel
configuration chapter to cover 6.0, but I gave up since there are "do
this for 4.X, do that for 5.X, and maybe this too for 6.X" everywhere.

-- 
Joel - joel at FreeBSD dot org




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1135090013.664.56.camel>