Re: [Artanis] Documentation and housekeeping

[Nala Ginrut]

Sofie Overstreet writes:

Hi Sofie!

> Hi list!
>
> While it is well documented to a certain point (good job guys, really)
> the eccentricities of zh -> en translation make reading the docs
> rather difficult. Also, I'm already finding some gaps in the initial
> setup.

zh -> en? Where did you see it?

> So, I'll be doing a top-down clean up of the docs as I familiarize
> myself with the project.
>
> But more importantly, in my opinion, is getting some meta
> documentation up. I've had to sort of reverse engineer how to build
> the docs ( I'm still not sure I'm doing it correctly.) and figure out
> how to contribute by trial and error. Not all maintainers are so
> pleasant when you make a mistake.

Yes, since maintainers always want to make it a high quality. Nowadays,
the quality requirement of a FOSS project, include documents, even higher than 
proprietory software.
But I still don't get why you need to reverse engineer?

> I was hoping to use this thread to discuss the meta of the meta; or
> what format you want to use to report and discuss documentation
> inaccuracies, retractions, additions, etc., and other things not
> directly related to the code or functionality.

Please go ahead. ;-)

> I'm hesitant to clutter the Gitlab issue tracker (I have quite a few
> very basic questions that need answered), so my suggestion is to
> simply use either this or the bug-artanis list and prepend [META] or
> [DOCS] to the subject.
>
> Thoughts?

Before you raise a topic in bug-artanis, pleae elaborate you mind in
this thread.


Best regards.


-- 
GNU Powered it
GPL Protected it
GOD Blessed it
HFG - NalaGinrut
Fingerprint F53B 4C56 95B5 E4D5 6093 4324 8469 6772 846A 0058

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature