Re: Improving the documentation

On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:50:58 -0500 Stuart Halloway wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:18:47 -0700 > > Terrance Davis wrote: > > > >> *begin rant* > >> > >> I have yet to see anyone who posts the classic "rtfm" (even politely) > >> response search previous posts and realize that "rtfm" response

Re: Improving the documentation

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:18:47 -0700 > Terrance Davis wrote: > >> *begin rant* >> >> I have yet to see anyone who posts the classic "rtfm" (even politely) >> response search previous posts and realize that "rtfm" responses have >> already been sent and refrain from sending the same explanation

Improving the documentation

On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:18:47 -0700 Terrance Davis wrote: > *begin rant* > > I have yet to see anyone who posts the classic "rtfm" (even politely) > response search previous posts and realize that "rtfm" responses have > already been sent and refrain from sending the same explanation of how >

Re: Improving the documentation

Status: I've applied for membership on the dev list, citing this thread so this can be discussed with the major contributors. 2009/8/18 Harold Ancell : > > At 10:20 AM 8/18/2009, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote: > >>Hi, > > Greetings and salutations. > >>On Aug 18, 4:50 pm, Harold Ancell wrote: >> >>> W

Re: Improving the documentation

At 10:20 AM 8/18/2009, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote: >Hi, Greetings and salutations. >On Aug 18, 4:50 pm, Harold Ancell wrote: > >> When I stumbled on the clojure-1.0.0.jar problem I updated >> the appropriate page there in a few minutes including >> registering an account, which isn't required: >

Re: Improving the documentation

Hi, On Aug 18, 4:50 pm, Harold Ancell wrote: > When I stumbled on the clojure-1.0.0.jar problem I updated > the appropriate page there in a few minutes including > registering an account, which isn't required: The problem with the wikibook site is, that they came up with some moronic "quality

Re: Improving the documentation

At 09:18 AM 8/18/2009, John Newman wrote: >I believe >http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Clojure_Programming > is the intended central location for contributing documentation. One issue with that site is its limited scope, "Wikibooks is a Wikimedia com

Re: Improving the documentation

I believe http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Clojure_Programming is the intended central location for contributing documentation. I've heard complaints about it's openness though. Is it a pain to try to contribute there? On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 4:52 AM, Seth wrote: > > I'm also very interested in a

Re: Improving the documentation

I'm also very interested in a more public wiki for Clojure and would help maintain it. Seth On Aug 17, 11:39 am, Ollie Saunders wrote: > OK, so given all the support this idea got and the amount of material > we already have. Who should I talk to about getting access to the > clojure.org wiki s

Re: Improving the documentation

OK, so given all the support this idea got and the amount of material we already have. Who should I talk to about getting access to the clojure.org wiki so more centralised contribution can start there? 2009/8/17 Mark Volkmann : > > On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Chas Emerick wrote: >> >>> On A

Re: Improving the documentation

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Chas Emerick wrote: > >> On Aug 16, 2009, at 8:52 PM, Mark Volkmann wrote: >> >>> I took a shot at it at >>> http://ociweb.com/mark/clojure/ClojureCategorized.html. Suggestions >>> for changes to this are welcomed. Also check out >>> http://ociweb.com/mark/clojure/

Re: Improving the documentation

There's some talk about adding this to contrib here: http://groups.google.com/group/clojure-dev/browse_thread/thread/dc3b601e8b794bef On Aug 16, 9:48 pm, David Plumpton wrote: > On Aug 17, 11:12 am, Ollie Saunders wrote: > > > Hi Clojurians, > > > I've been learning Clojure for about 5 or so d

Re: Improving the documentation

On Aug 17, 11:12 am, Ollie Saunders wrote: > Hi Clojurians, > > I've been learning Clojure for about 5 or so days (I'm osaunders on > the channel) now and I'm liking it a lot. However, the lack of > structure ofhttp://clojure.org/apiis hampering my learning a bit. I > wonder other people think it

Re: Improving the documentation

> I took a shot at it at > http://ociweb.com/mark/clojure/ClojureCategorized.html. Suggestions > for changes to this are welcomed. Also check out > http://ociweb.com/mark/clojure/article.html. > > -- > R. Mark Volkmann > Object Computing, Inc. > > Since you're asking. :-) That page would be greatl

Re: Improving the documentation

On Aug 16, 2009, at 7:12 PM, Ollie Saunders wrote: > I've been learning Clojure for about 5 or so days (I'm osaunders on > the channel) now and I'm liking it a lot. However, the lack of > structure of http://clojure.org/api is hampering my learning a bit. I > wonder other people think it might be

Re: Improving the documentation

You might find these pages somewhat helpful: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Clojure_Programming/Examples/API_Examples http://clj-doc.s3.amazonaws.com/tmp/doc-1116/index.html http://java.ociweb.com/mark/clojure/ClojureCategorized.html More generally, I'd agree that the Clojure sites need some struct

Re: Improving the documentation

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Ollie Saunders wrote: > > Hi Clojurians, > > I've been learning Clojure for about 5 or so days (I'm osaunders on > the channel) now and I'm liking it a lot. However, the lack of > structure of http://clojure.org/api is hampering my learning a bit. I > wonder other

Improving the documentation

Hi Clojurians, I've been learning Clojure for about 5 or so days (I'm osaunders on the channel) now and I'm liking it a lot. However, the lack of structure of http://clojure.org/api is hampering my learning a bit. I wonder other people think it might be a nice idea to organise the functions into