[vlc-devel] Re: [RFC] New doc module?
jpsaman at wxs.nl
Wed Jan 15 19:15:00 CET 2003
Loïc Minier wrote:
> 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.
I agree with sam. The drawback of having developers manage the websites
contents is that it easily becomes a mess. Why? Because to many people
are then involved.
>>> 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 like having documentation in the tarball of VLC. If I needs some info,
then I can look it up without searching for a network outlet or a
telephone. Even if the documentation is not updated yet, then there is
still enough information in the available docs to get the overall
context and picture. Details can be looked up in the source luke ;-)
my 2ct's worth
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