Here are my thoughts, FWIW: * Fully-documented software with all the polish is the ideal. Nobody gets there, not even commercial software. * Documented software with some things undocumented is better than no documentation. * Released software with no documentation, but complete functionality, is *usually* better than unreleased software.
People have been banging on 3.0 long enough that I think it is *relatively* bug-free (though I have a problem in a recent build that I'm tracking down, will bug report when I can repro reliably). *I* would cut a 3.0 release, but not cut a 3.0.1 without docs unless you find a critical bug. Make sense? --Paul On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Craig Earls <[email protected]> wrote: > As the guy that volunteered to do the Manual and only got about 50% of > what I wanted accomplished, I would say move forward to release. Maybe > more users beating on it would help push the manual forward. It is a > pretty good manual even if incomplete. > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:53 AM, John Wiegley <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >>>>> milki <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > Just noticed, the github page for ledger is missing a 3.0 git tag. This >> may be >> > a roadblock for updating packages on some distributions. Will it be >> created >> > soon? >> >> I've been resistant to releasing 3.0 until the manual is done for it, but >> perhaps it's reached the time that we should just go with what we have? >> >> John >> > > > > -- > Craig, Corona De Tucson, AZ > enderw88.wordpress.com >
