2014-02-26 9:22 GMT+01:00 Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 08:57:36PM -0500, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 25, 2014, at 8:44 PM, Evan Huus <eapache@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm all for consolidating the above information - we just need to
>> > decide which of the many places to consolidate *to*. We've been
>> > playing musical chairs every few months moving things around from A to
>> > B, B to C, and C to A, but never actually getting anywhere.
>>
>> Personally I think the wiki makes the most sense, because none of that stuff is specific to the code version/branch/state; as opposed to the info in most of the docs/READMEs, which are specific to the release.
>>
>> Also we can subscribe to changes of that wiki page, and thereby get notified via email of changes instead of happening to notice a change in a txt/asciidoc file in the code tree.
>>
>> It's really the kind of thing a wiki's for, imo.
>
> -2
>
> a) Develpment documentation must be available for offline work.
> Folding the development READMEs into the developer guide now
> that the stuff has moved over to asciidoc would reduce the
> number of places to two - and the developer's guide is available
> via web, so there is no problem with creating tutorials and
> similar stuff in the wiki and then linking to the dg for the
> details.
As Evan pointed out you can download pages from the wiki.
Maintaining the work-flow in the source code repository is not a good idea.
> b) My preferred workflow doesn't require me to use a web browser
> (except for bugzilla, the wiki and ask - and there is a reason
> why I don't show much presence in either of these things).
I can understand that you don't prefer using web browsers, but
gerrit's command line interface does not really allow you to
discuss changes. AFAIK you can not add comments to specific
lines or answer comments related to specific on reviews submitted
by you.
Basically not using a browser allows contribution but prevents full
collaboration.
Cheers,
Balint