Social problems of Python doc [was Re: Python docs disappointing]
breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Aug 11 09:56:39 CEST 2009
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> r <rt8396 <at> gmail.com> writes:
>> On Aug 9, 11:02 pm, David Lyon <david.l... at preisshare.net> wrote:
>>> Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
>>> don't you think you should be discussing it on python-dev ?
>> Yea, them's be a friendly bunch to noob ideas ;). Hey i got a better
>> idea, lets go to the IRS and see if we can persuade them to stop
>> taxing us...
> You know, the most interesting thing in this thread is certainly its title :
> « Social problems of Python doc »
> Yes, the little social problem here should be clear: if you have complaints to
> voice or improvements to suggest to the Python docs, you should do so on the
> issue tracker (*). For most topics, this is the only reasonable way to signal
> problems to the Python developers community, and so it is in most free software
> / open source projects.
> Just because you are able to write tongue-in-cheek (**) comments on python-list
> or, even worse, on a third party website, and generate a long thread about how
> Python doc (supposedly) s*cks
> 1) doesn't mean there is a legitimate issue (we all know how people can quickly
> inflame about empty subjects)
> 2) even though there can be a legitimate issue, doesn't mean Python developers
> will go out of their way and parse the entirety of the messages to find
> potentially useful data in them. The bug tracker is the place for this, and it's
> your task, if you want to help, to submit suggestions in it.
> FYI, the Python doc is very actively maintained nowadays, and bug reports /are/
> taken into account. If you think you've got a lot of time for ranting about how
> the doc sucks, but don't want to spend the couple of minutes needed to post
> issues on the bug tracker, it speaks a lot about your motivation. Admittedly, in
> every successful community, there are attention seekers who are not interested
> in actual participation.
> (*) http://bugs.python.org
> (**) yes, humour is fine, but it doesn't replace actual, informational content
Thank you for this fine, cultured, reasonable response. Seriously!!!
More information about the Python-list