On Sunday 12 April 2009 15:59:38 Steve Scaffidi wrote: > I stumbled upon this article the other day, and it's a fun read and really > highlights some of the things I like about git.
On the topic of stumbling upon documentation, it would be wonderful to have a "commented bibliography" of what's available, on the net or off, with a brief description of the focus and audience of each document, and a critique of its quality (the minimal incarnation of this critique could be a 1-to-5 star rating, althoug that's a bit too low-dimensional for me). I think this would help people, especially those that are newcomers to git, to know where to start, and then where to go for specific topics. >From what I've seen, git is in a relatively good position, in the sense that there isn't a ton of documentation, tutorials, etc. (so there is less opportunity for contradictory or wrong info, and its lengthy weeding) and what there is is generally fair to good quality. On the other hand, I'm not sure there is a source that could be considered excellent... Bernardo Rechea _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list Boston-pm@mail.pm.org http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
