Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-30 Thread David Hurka
On Thursday, July 1, 2021 12:03:44 AM CEST Frederik Schwarzer wrote: > Hi everyone, > > thank you for your input and sorry it took me a while to reply. > > For now I have created a list of issues on gitlab to be reminded. > https://invent.kde.org/teams/documentation/sprints/-/issues > > [...] C

Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-30 Thread Frederik Schwarzer
Hi everyone, thank you for your input and sorry it took me a while to reply. For now I have created a list of issues on gitlab to be reminded. https://invent.kde.org/teams/documentation/sprints/-/issues Some issues I started to investigate but was struck by kapidox_generate being broken on my

Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-14 Thread David Hurka
Hi Frederik, here is my report about a negative experience with existing documentation: > So what to report? Documentation that ... > - [...] > - has holes in it. For example a tutorial where you suddenly think, >you skipped an important step. > - you wish was there but you could not find it.

Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-14 Thread Adriaan de Groot
On Wednesday, 9 June 2021 01:20:23 CEST Frederik Schwarzer wrote: > I would like to ask you to report such documentation to me. We see the > topic come up here and there but it then sometimes sinks into oblivion > again because it was part of a merge request that has then been merged > or so. Here

Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-10 Thread Michael Reeves
One thing the seems entirely missing is any documentation what so ever of craft's runtime confurable options. I'm talking things maintainers can do in their config scripts not the end-user config file which is self documented. On Wed, Jun 9, 2021, 1:27 PM Frederik Schwarzer wrote: > > > On 6/9/2

Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-09 Thread Frederik Schwarzer
On 6/9/21 6:02 PM, Johannes Zarl-Zierl wrote: Hi, Am Mittwoch, 9. Juni 2021, 01:20:23 CEST schrieb Frederik Schwarzer: I would like to ask you to report such documentation to me. We see the topic come up here and there but it then sometimes sinks into oblivion again because it was part of a

Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-09 Thread Ahmad Samir
On 09/06/2021 18:02, Johannes Zarl-Zierl wrote: Hi, Am Mittwoch, 9. Juni 2021, 01:20:23 CEST schrieb Frederik Schwarzer: I would like to ask you to report such documentation to me. We see the topic come up here and there but it then sometimes sinks into oblivion again because it was part of a m

Re: Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-09 Thread Johannes Zarl-Zierl
Hi, Am Mittwoch, 9. Juni 2021, 01:20:23 CEST schrieb Frederik Schwarzer: > I would like to ask you to report such documentation to me. We see the > topic come up here and there but it then sometimes sinks into oblivion > again because it was part of a merge request that has then been merged > or s

Progress is good for us but bad for documentation

2021-06-08 Thread Frederik Schwarzer
Hi, we are all making progress but the way to notice it can be painful. Looking at something you created years ago might make you cringe, but that's actually a good sign. It indicates, that you made progress. KDE is making progress as well. Here the indicator is outdated documentation. There