Alec Warner wrote:
> On 11/28/07, Donnie Berkholz <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 19:10 Tue 27 Nov , Alec Warner wrote:
>>> No, because this is not a realistic requirement, it's an ideal case.
>>> People will just commit changes without documentation anyway.
>> Here's my understanding of what you said: Because people will break
>> rules and violate standards, we shouldn't have any.
>> Is that accurate?
> Kind of.
> Most people follow most rules. Most people break a subset of rules.
> You are essentially adding an unreasonable (in my view) rule that I
> expect nearly everyone to break or ignore, thereby adding little or no
> value to the project as whole. Most people care about documentation
> in the abstract sense, almost no one cares *enough* to write any
> Forcing people to write documentation won't get it written, people
> will continue to act like we just saw and either the rule will get
> ignored, or someone will change the rule, or people will leave because
> the rule is enforced aggressively and it has ruined the ability to
> contribute to the project.
> This is why I offered to write the GLEP for Diego and Cardoe, because
> I know they are not interested in writing it themselves. Thats why we
> have a doc-team that for some sick reason enjoy writing and
> maintaining documentation.
Load of crap. I wrote full documentation and provided patches to the
Developer Handbook, where metadata is documented. A GLEP is a terrible
place to document this since you have to read through 5 different GLEPs
and automatically cross out the parts that are no longer valid or have
been replaced by newer parts of the GLEP. Which is why once again, the
GLEP is stupid and one central location on one topic should be kept up
to date. As I have done.
email@example.com mailing list