On May 21, 2007, at 7:15 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
Will Coleda wrote:
If you notice any missing documentation, please open an RT ticket
with [DOCS] in the subject. ((It won't be processed specially by
RT, but will help me search.)) Ask on the list. Send patches,
either to the parrot repo
On May 21, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Mark Glines wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 18:51:48 -0400
Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you notice any missing documentation, please open an RT ticket
with [DOCS] in the subject. ((It won't be processed specially by RT,
but will help me search.)) Ask on the
On Mon, 21 May 2007 19:27:26 -0400
James E Keenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Glines wrote:
> >
> > Think its worth adding a
> > codingstd test for POD coverage?
> >
> >
>
> No.
>
> Or perhaps: No, not unless you want to start a big "philosophical"
> argument about POD coverage.
>
> I
Mark Glines wrote:
Think its worth adding a
codingstd test for POD coverage?
No.
Or perhaps: No, not unless you want to start a big "philosophical"
argument about POD coverage.
I say this as someone who dissents from the prevailing wisdom about POD
coverage as it relates to CPAN module
Will Coleda wrote:
If you notice any missing documentation, please open an RT ticket with
[DOCS] in the subject. ((It won't be processed specially by RT, but will
help me search.)) Ask on the list. Send patches, either to the parrot
repo or the website.
If we're proposing revisions to ex
On Mon, 21 May 2007 18:51:48 -0400
Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you notice any missing documentation, please open an RT ticket
> with [DOCS] in the subject. ((It won't be processed specially by RT,
> but will help me search.)) Ask on the list. Send patches, either to
> the parr
My primary goal as project manager is to improve the state of
documentation of parrot.
Everything from the code (to lower the bar to new contributors), the
docs (for parrot users and HLL authors), the plan (milestones,
tickets, etc.), etc.
If you notice any missing documentation, please o
