Definitely. It should be clear that all the apache infra that's setup for Ripple should be targetted towards contributors/committers/developers, not consumers.
On 1/17/13 9:16 AM, "Brent Lintner" <[email protected]> wrote: >I concur that it could be helpful, although (too add my two cents), I >wonder if it should be strictly for non developer oriented content (?), or >at all (?).. > >My reasoning is that, with a `doc` folder in the repository, we should be >able to document (and host on the web, even) documentation (which includes >guides, API docs, etc) from the repository itself (in an easy to >understand >format- MD or something else, which could be translated into HTML). > >Why? Well, I think maintaining a singular location for documentation (at >least for developer oriented content) would be beneficial as it could have >documentation in one (succinct) place. It would also (ideally) encourage >documentation to not only be be created alongside submitted features, etc, >but be part of the actual commits that introduced said features, etc (if >warranted). > >However, I am not too sure how this could work in practise (or the setup >and organization of the `doc` folder), and if it is something that would >be >possible as an ASF project, so a Wiki may be (traditionally) better >(specially for people to add content easily), but, not to say it is not >something to consider (I think). :-) > >For example, see: https://github.com/isaacs/npm/wiki > >On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Dan Silivestru ><[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I think we should request a wiki for our project. I'm thinking it would >>be >> a great place to document Ripple both from a contributor perspective >>and a >> developer's perspective. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- >> Dan Silivestru >> +1 (519) 589-3624 >> > > > >-- >Brent
