On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:52 PM, John Gabriele wrote:
> I agree that great docs are a top priority, however, the way they're
> currently being provided for external Clojure projects seems to be
> pretty good for the time being. I mean, most Clojure projects are
> using github, and github happily r
On Jun 25, 11:58 pm, Michael Klishin
wrote:
>
> Please don't get discouraged.
Thanks for the kind words, Michael! :) Not discouraged, but rather, I
want to make best use of existing resources.
> There are similar services (readthedocs.org, rubydoc.info) and they took a
> while (years) to
> get
John Gabriele:
> So, it now seems that the alcove --- in its current incarnation --- is
> not as useful as I'd originally thought. I'm going to remove it, and
> instead focus on helping make sure projects on Clojars have their :url
> and :description in order.
John,
Please don't get discouraged.
On Jun 24, 11:32 pm, John Gabriele wrote:
>
> Opinions? Concerns? Wild praise? Searing complaints? General disinterest?
>
Hi all,
Thanks to feeback --- both here and elsewhere. A handful of points are
now clear:
* It probably *is* too much trouble to ask folks to fork & send a
pull-request ju
On Jun 25, 2:36 am, Vinzent wrote:
>
> Honestly, what I'd really appreciate is a full-blown community site, kind
> of mix between clojure-toolbox, clojuredocs and emacswiki.
I like clojure-toolbox. It's categorization of projects is quite
useful, IMO.
--
You received this message because you ar
One thing I forgot to mention: it'd be nice to have Marginalia support,
since it can be used not only for annotated source code, but also for
documentation with embedded tests (although, two-column layout doesn't fit
very well for this purpose, but it's another question).
> That's true. The
On Jun 25, 12:52 am, Vinzent wrote:
> It's a great initiative indeed, but I found the project pretty useless in
> its current state. Forking the repo and sending a pull request just to add
> an example is painful.
Hm. Thanks for the feedback.
> Also, I can read rendered readme on github (and hav
On Jun 25, 12:14 am, Michael Klishin
wrote:
> John Gabriele:
>
> > Opinions? Concerns? Wild praise? Searing complaints? General disinterest?
>
> This is a great initiative but so far it seems to focus only on the API
> reference part of documentation.
I'd think that autogenerated docstring docs
It's a great initiative indeed, but I found the project pretty useless in
its current state. Forking the repo and sending a pull request just to add
an example is painful. Also, I can read rendered readme on github (and have
the source code at hand), so why go to another site?
I think what woul
John Gabriele:
> Opinions? Concerns? Wild praise? Searing complaints? General disinterest?
This is a great initiative but so far it seems to focus only on the API
reference part of documentation.
I personally think that documentation guides are just as important [1].
For clojurewerkz.org projec
Hi all,
I was looking for a way to:
* encourage folks to write docs for their Clojure projects
* make usage examples available (like clojuredocs.org has, but for
general Clojure-related projects)
* help semi-standardize how Clojure projects are documented
So I made this:
http://www.unexpe
11 matches
Mail list logo
