Re: Question regarding the documentation
Steve McMahon <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In my opinion, LinguaPlone is a special case. It's as close to core as any product will ever be, and is community developed. Also, after several generations of work, there's still no specific documentation area for the product, so it's probably not going to develop. So, I'm +1 for integration into existing documentation! On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Israel Saeta Pérez <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Gustavo Orrillo > <gustavo.orrillo-MNlxzY3ygasU7WH4Fnm6qAC/[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Hope everything is fine over there. I have this question. I would like to >> add LinguaPlone documentation to the manual. So far, LinguaPlone is (IMHO) >> the de-facto standard for managing multilingual content in Plone. Should we >> add LinguaPlone documentation to the manual? Or should we create a document >> stating that there are multiple products that help administrators manage >> multilingual content, for instance LinguaPlone? >> >> Any thoughts on this will be more than welcome, > > > As far as I know, our current policy is not including 3rd-party products > docs into the main plone.org documentation area, since these docs should be > part of each 3rd-party product own documentation. > > Should we break this policy here? > > -- israel -- Steve McMahon Reid-McMahon, LLC steve-HR5nRXif9uVv8oa/[email protected] [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword