Hi ng0, ng0 <contact....@cryptolab.net> skribis:
> Let's take this thread, starting at > "https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2017-04/msg00329.html";. > Ludovic worked on something, pushed it, did some changes to the relevant > documentation but further examples in the documentation which are now > affected weren't fixed with the push. We spent time answering questions > about broken configurations, assuming everyone who uses GuixSD now and > in the future has a fairly competent knowledge of Guile, explaining changes > which could have been avoided - or at least reduced in frequency of questions > asked - by changing examples. I think there’s a misunderstanding. This change is what started the discussion we’re having with Carlo, but it is a compatible change: GuixSD configs that previously worked still do. Thus I don’t think anyone spent time “answering questions about broken configurations” in this case. For the same reason, examples in the doc that were valid before are still valid after the change. > If Ludovic would've presented this change before applying it, it would've > been one of the obvious problems: don't just document the change, change > further documentation sections which rely on this. This way we don't have > a documentation which presents people examples but contradicts itself later > on. What part of the documentation contradicts itself? I’m confused. As for posting the change before applying it, I should do more of that. I’ve taken the bad habit of pushing what I consider as “simple” changes directly to the repo, but perhaps the criteria should be reconsidered. :-) Thoughts? Ludo’.
