On 2019/09/03 11:28, Júlio Campos wrote: > Why can't we have decoupled codebase documentation sponsored by Rails? > > I know it sounds trivial or minor, but as a Brazilian and non-native > English speaker, I know the difficulties a person may have when trying to > learn a new technology and not have localized documentation.
I agree. > ruby-lang.org has translated documentation and it has worked despite the > lack of sync with the original texts. Please note that ruby-lang.org contains general information, not API documentation. General information is more stable over time, and there's less of a cost if occasionally some change in the English version isn't translated asap. Regards, Martin. > On 5 August 2019 at 13:31:56, Xavier Noria (f...@hashref.com) wrote: > > FWIW, we've discussed this several times in the past. > > In the Rails code base, everything is in sync because the documentation is > tighted to the software. A complete PR should ideally have code, tests, and > docs. API and guides affected by the patch. A Rails release ships code and > docs together. > > We are not interested in officially supporting translations, because there > is no way contributors can write in different languages. Docs would be left > behind, and it is a matter of time that they are too out of sync. > > That said, for people that are interested in doing the work, guides > generation have a minimal support for locales. But that would be out of the > development cycle of Rails, and not part of the official documentation. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-core/cb5715b8-ff90-f178-50df-636d33b2a7e0%40it.aoyama.ac.jp.
