Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/06/27/13:48:07
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 11:19:51AM -0500, Jason Dufair wrote:
>>However, I can see that the documentation could be misconstrued.
>>Cygwin's documentation is not perfect. I don't know of any project
>>which has perfect documentation. I would dearly love to have someone
>>actively working on it.
>>
>I'll step up and volunteer to work on documentation. I've been building
>up to working on coding (getting cygwin and the tools to compile for a
>start) since I'm a hacker first, but I am aware that too many open
>source projects are in dire need of documentatation and I'm getting
>sufficient number of technical challenges at work at this point.
>
>Unless you prefer to have more people writing code, of course.
> Christopher (or anyone), can you give me a ballpark idea of what needs
>to be done and where I might start? I've spent a fair amount of time
>under the "Contributing" link, but it seems mostly to be about writing
>code. Should I look at updating the user's guide? The FAQ? I've been
>using cygwin since about b17 and have been on and off the list, so I
>think I'm fairly qualified to help with the docs. And I'll certainly
>consult the list or whomever I should consult about suggested updates
>and changes.
I'd appreciate contributions to whatever you find most interesting.
We have a FAQ maintainer but I'm sure he'd appreciate specific words or
improvements.
The docs need a lot of work (as always), so if you are so inclined, I
would appreciate updates there. I actually haven't looked at them in a
while so I don't know how much rot they have suffered. It is obvious
that the philosophy section should be beefed up.
The docs and the FAQ are all under CVS control. Maybe we need a
"Contributing docs" link which talks about how to modify the
documentation?
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -