On 07/01/18 23:16, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Seems I forgot to update the symlink when we released. I fixed that.
Thanks
for pointing it out.
No problem.
I consider this an error in your reasoning. The bugtracker is very
lowlevel, and should be usable and familiar for all. Many of the
documentation bugreports are from one-time users, people I never
have heard from.
Maybe so. I consider it rude to submit an issue to a bugtracker as a
fly-by. The submitter should be willing to research and work with the
developer(s) to reproduce/resolve the issue. That's not really feasible
unless one is an active user.
This is known. I better remove it, it does more damage than good now.
I wouldn't remove it altogether, but maybe move it off the page with the
main documentation links and clearly label it as outdated. That may
give someone an incentive to update it while not confusing new users.
But most of the time when I search for something, I just enter google,
type
"free pascal timer". The third hit is the same as the one I mention
above.
You can't beat google for ease of use and accuracy.
With this, I differ. Google != accuracy! Google is a distraction, a
time sink, and a rabbit trail inducer. The last thing I want to do
while in the middle of coding is to get online and search for
something. I'm usually "in the zone" and want to have the needed
documentation in front of me on a separate screen. Offline. OFFICIAL
documentation, not some anonymous blogger's explanation of how it works,
not some anonymous forum post that attempts to explain something.
Contrary to what it may seem it is not so easy to make a search engine
for
the documentation. I've had several shots at it, but have not yet come up
with a good mechanism. The last mechanism I tried ended up indexing more
than 24 hours before I killed it.
While a working search may go a long way toward alleviating the
problems, I don't see that as the major issue. The major issue, to me,
is that almost everything is auto-generated from the source (at least
the reference material, not necessarily the tutorials). There needs to
be more organizational design, more thought put into useful indices.
You can't auto-generate a *good* index. There are cross-references and
relational inferences that only a human can make. For a project of this
size, that may be too much for a single person, no matter how good they
are. So, I guess the bottom line is that fpc needs more documentation
contributors. And that requires people with a thorough knowledge of the
material, not newcomers.
Contributions or ideas welcome.
That's what I'm trying to do. And, thank you for your own heroic
contributions!
-Jim
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
