On 23 Dec 2005, at 0:53, Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: > Robey Pointer wrote: >> On 22 Dec 2005, at 3:51, Michael Hudson wrote: >> >>> "Fredrik Lundh" <fredrik at pythonware.com> writes: >>> >>>> Checked the python-list archives lately? If you google c.l.python >>>> for the >>>> word "documentation", you'll find recent megathreads with subjects >>>> like >>>> "bitching about the documentation", "opensource documentation >>>> problems" >>>> and "python documentation should be better" among the top hits. >>>> But if >>>> you check the bug and patch trackers, you don't find many >>>> contributions. >>>> Something's definitely broken. >>> >>> Hmm, it's this discussion again! Let me make my point again! >>> >>> Writing good documentation is hard. >> >> I can only speak for my own experience, but maybe it will help. I >> once tried to help fix a piece of the python docs. The description >> of Py_UNICODE on <http://docs.python.org/api/unicodeObjects.html> was >> -- and still is -- incorrect. > > The current docs were released on September 28. They are not > updated until > the next Python release, so that's probably why your patch doesn't > show up there. > > That may not be a good thing. Documentation fixes should go online > much > quicker than with every Python release, or am I mistaken? Yes, I think that's obviously ridiculous on the face of it, since fixes to the python 2.4 docs may be useless by the time 2.5 comes out, and may be too late to help anyone anyway. :) I'm glad I'm not the only one who found the process completely broken, at least. robey
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4