[vlc-devel] Re: [RFC] New doc module?
lool at via.ecp.fr
Wed Jan 15 19:00:32 CET 2003
Sam Hocevar <sam at zoy.org> - Wed, Jan 15, 2003:
> One simple example: http://test.videolan.org/vlc/features.html,
> filling this table is definitely a developer's job. Why should we deny
> developers the possibility to update the website? Some projects go
> even further and have their whole website managed by a Wiki (SDLperl).
I don't see why developers should bother describing the "product", it's
either the job of the project members right now.
> If by "storing" you mean you mean "have a generated plaintext version
> in the CVS", then I agree.
> > Do you think developers are working with older versions of the
> > documentation others than the latest one?
> No I don't. Why?
Because that means problem 5 is not a problem (for me at least).
> I meant it's a good thing to have the FAQ in the VLC CVS because it
> makes it easier for the packagers to ship VLC with its FAQ.
I thought exactly the contrary (hence all the preceding). Anyway, I
give up, you're the boss.
> ... uuencoded PDF ...
> Given the amount of tools needed to build VLC, I don't think anyone
> will notice we added one. :-)
> gnupg's [FAQ] is really cool
ARGH! Stop trolling me!
This is the vlc-devel mailing-list, see http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
To unsubscribe, please read http://www.videolan.org/lists.html
If you are in trouble, please contact <postmaster at videolan.org>
More information about the vlc-devel