Re: What would an "An Official" GNU Emacs Book look like?

[Emanuel Berg]

Vaidheeswaran C <address@hidden>
writes:

> I am trying to get senior Emacs developers involved
> (early in the cycle) to ensure that the Emacs Primer
> I am proposing is of comparable quality to
> Emacs Manual.

If your supposed project is comparable to the Emacs
Manual it is much better you read the Emacs Manual and
see if you can improve it, put down you suggestions,
and submit them.

It is not a good idea to try to do the same thing
a second time with the hope it will be as good.
It won't - how can it? it's impossible as the Emacs
manual has been around for ages with tons of people
contributing and reporting bugs and submitting
suggestions how to improve it - but even more, it
doesn't make sense: even if it becomes as good, what
is the point of having two things that are the same?

If you like the Emacs Manual, work to improve it.

If you don't like it, or if you do like it but want to
do something different, which is sensible, then what
does the Emacs Manual or all the other things you
mention have to do with it?

> I am new to the list. So it is understandable that
> there is some reluctance (even in principle) to lend
> me some help.

The reason you don't get help is because you don't
offer a clear picture what you want to do. You talk
about Git, listbots, "senior Emacs developers", and
the Emacs Manual but you shouldn't talk about that,
you should say: "I want to do a book/program that
solves THIS problem like THIS for THIS reason..." If
you do that, many people will offer assistance.

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573