Roberto wrote: "However, I fear that things can get out of hand and outdated. I was involved for a while with the Portuguese-HOWTO (Linux) and it was a nightmare to keep so many different "subversions" for the different distros under the howto. So I think we should label the maintainers and dates those specific portions (which would be representated as chapters) of the guides were last updated. "
Yes, that's precisely what I meant. That each OS gets a sub-chapter of the Install chapter and each distro perhaps gets a sub-sub-chapter.
Roberto wrote: "The documentation included with the ACS didn't really follow this in all packages, but I like the "For Everyone, For Admins, For Developers" division. Since OpenACS is composed of lots of little packages, I think it would be fairly easy for new packages to follow this convention."
OK, this is a very good convention to follow. I agree that your suggestion maps to my points as well.
Don Baccus wrote: But for this release ... my personal goals are very modest. For beta even more so.
I agree with this too. I assume we'll more or less be releasing the aD docs with edits and and small fixes. But from the versions on those docs are .1, .2, etc. So I hope that they are complete but those numbers sort of lead me to believe otherwise, especially since now the system works in PG as well.
I also think it's important to have a way to attach important bboard threads, comments or other things to each doc associated with a package, module or app. I'm mostly thinking about how to design docs.openacs.org so that a crude "knowledge management" system, if I can use that term, can be made so searches for fixes, bugs or info becomes easier.
talli
