Re: Plone 3.2 User Manual Update

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexander Limi [mailto:limi-z4DKO/[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 December 2008 10:21 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Plone-docs] Plone 3.2 User Manual Update
> 
> On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:41:55 -0800, Israel Saeta Pérez
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Veda Williams wrote:
> >
> >>  If it's just the content of the manual, and not the URL itself, we
> >> should
> >> change it.
> >>
> >
> > Somebody's already done that. I've just changed the "applies to" field.
> 
> Speaking of which, why are there separate values for "3.0.x" and "3.1.x"?
> Again, if the documentation for something is different between these two
> something else is wrong, and it should be corrected in Plone.
> 
> (it's perfectly kosher to say "if you're on Plone 3.1 or later, there is
> an easier way of accomplishing the same, […]", but this should be done on
> a case-by-case basis, and not be a separate document.)
> 
> The filtering on versions loses its value if it's too granular. It's
> supposed to be a broad-strokes separation so that Plone 2.5 docs can be
> handled differently than the Plone 3 docs.

For the user manual you make an excellent point that it should track just
major versions.
But api manual would be very every release yeah?
An installation/deployment/maintenance manual... that might be less often.
Could be confusing if different manuals are tracking different granularities
as how does the user know they have the right set of manuals for the Plone
release they are using?



------------------------------------------------------------------------------