[fpc-pascal] State of FPC docs.rant

[David Emerson]

On Mon 26 Apr 2010, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> Florian Klaempfl het geskryf:
> > 
> > No git mirror ;)? I think the docs are one of the fpc related 
> > repositories where using a dvcs might be useful.
> 
> Apparently I am banned for life mentioning the "product that may not be
> named" in FPC or Lazarus mailing lists. :-)
> 
> As for moving to such a DVCS... why bother? I think I can count on two
> hands the amount of commits per year. As for it being a "pilot" of a DVCS -
>  that would be a pointless exercise with such a slow moving repository.

I would love to contribute to the documentation -- I fancy myself good at 
writing, explaining, and making examples -- but as noted earlier in the thread, 
the barrier to entry is quite high.

I'm far more comfortable using git than svn, and if there was such a repo it 
would help lower the barrier to entry for me at least. The lack of a simple 
tutorial on how to add to the documentation still remains a significant 
barrier, however.

Graeme, I have to ask... on the one hand, you noted that having fragmented 
documentations over various locations is unhelpful; and on the other hand, I've 
heard you talk quite a bit about your DocView / INF project; I note in 
particular that you mentioned rewriting the FPC language reference in IPF. How 
is this not an example of the fragmentation you refer to?

Don't get me wrong -- based on your explanations, I think DocView is a great 
idea, and I have been looking forward to trying it out, but I continue to 
wonder how well it will integrate with the present doc system and if it might 
lower the barrier to entry for contributing to the documentation.

Cheers,
David