Re: docs.zope.org

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 05:41:08PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> On 8/4/10 17:38 , Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> > IMHO trying to come up with some kind of programmatic algorithm to judge
> > a bit of documentation as "good enough to show" is insane. I'm  not
> > going to attempt it.
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> > Maybe "shitty" (for some definition of "shitty", as someone else would
> > say) package docs will compel the maintainers to improve them.
> 
> I doubt it, considering the exposure of "shitty" docs on pypi does not 
> seem to have had any impact (aside from scaring away potential users).

Crappy docs on PyPI make me want to run away (with one exception: ReST
formatting errors on PyPI make me want to check out the source and fix
them).

Crappy docs on docs.zope.org make me want to check out the source
package and commit fixes.

I'm not prepared to speculate why I'm having these reactions -- is it a
prettier CSS?  The splitting of the docs into multiple reasonably-sized
pages instead of one huge undigestable lump?

I guess what I'm saying is: there's hope yet, don't give up!

Marius Gedminas
-- 
http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3/BlueBream consulting and development

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [email protected]
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkxZz88ACgkQkVdEXeem14+WLQCfTvwrvwH7H7XcitvW6sBMNEqf
OoEAniIGXzFt6+b5b6BR2QJVKq/S4fsI
=TLa1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----