On Sun, 05 Apr 2015 23:19:38 +0200
Anto <aryanto@???> wrote:

>
>
> On 05/04/15 22:21, Steve Litt wrote:
> > On Sun, 05 Apr 2015 22:00:49 +0200
> > Anto <aryanto@???> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I agree that we need to have good documentations to minimise
> >> mistakes. But without a good base for the documentations, I don't
> >> think it is worth to start writing them now. It will make sense to
> >> write Devuan documentations after it is being released and
> >> stabilised.
> > I'd say concurrently with the distro release. So many perceived
> > technical problems are really documentation problems or lack of
> > documentation. If we'd always had good documentation, silly
> > "intuitive" user interfaces that really simply mimic human
> > ambiguity (Gnome, Unity) would not have happened.
> >
> > See this Debian-User thread, where a new user was rudely RTFMed
> > because he didn't check Google after not finding the info in Debian
> > docs:
> >
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2015/04/msg00131.html
> >
> > After being given a snarky remark with a "Let Me Google That For
> > You", the OP asked the most pertinent question: "So is Google
> > manditory for use of Debian now?"
> >
> > Long before the Linux kernel existed, there was this cultural belief
> > that if you can't use a sparse and ambiguous man page, you're just
> > not a man. In my opinion, this is wrong, documentation should not
> > be an afterthought, and if you're going to write software and hope
> > for folks ot use it, you'd better make sure there's adequate,
> > readable, and unambiguous documentation.
> >
> > SteveT
> >
> > Steve Litt
> > Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting
> > http://www.troubleshooters.com/28
>
> Are we are talking about Devuan or a new generic Linux distro?
>
> If it would be Devuan, I think there is no reason to spend a lot of
> efforts in re-writing the existing Debian documentations.

True. Only Debian's omissions and Devuan's changes to Debian need
documentation.

> The initial
> release of Devuan will be mostly the same as Debian jessie, except
> the systemd related parts. So most of the Debian jessie
> documentations can be re-used for Devuan. Perhaps, some notes need to
> be added, especially on anything related to systemd. But I don't
> think it would be problems to refer to Debian documentations on other
> generic parts.

No, that wouldn't be a problem at all.


SteveT

Steve Litt
Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting
http://www.troubleshooters.com/28