On Jun 19, 2007, at 1:42 PM, Jonathan Langevin wrote:
> I'm not saying the developers aren't capable of providing > documentation. Docs for 1.1 are probably the nicest I've seen > (although since the group convinced me to try 1.2, I've become very > frustrated with 1.2 's lack of docs). my comment wasn't intended to > put down anyone, my thinking is to keep trademark and legalities > separated from open-source documentation. > > think about it like this: if I were to develop an application using > CakePHP, and redistribute the application + cake along with > documentation, there would apparently be a legal issue, as the > Manual is considered the intellectual property of the Cake > Foundation, correct? Why would you need to distribute the docs when they're already freely available? > \so if there were a truly unencumbered documentation repository, > this situation could be avoided. additionally, if cake > documentation were to ever fall into "disrepair", a new initiative > could be started for the documentation without infringing on > someone's intellectual property > > i'm not saying that developers should be excluded by any means, so > please don't be offended by my remarks We're just trying to understand your concerns - please don't take disagreement as anything more than disagreement. :) -- John --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake PHP" group. To post to this group, send email to cake-php@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
