From: Tom Allison <tallison@...>
Date: 2006-06-17T10:58:19+09:00
Subject: Re: Whats new/fixed in Ruby 1.9 and Ruby 2.0

Austin Ziegler wrote:

> The Ruby web pages should primarily talk about production releases.
> Not future releases. The folks beind Ruby aren't into vapourware the
> way that Microsoft is.
> 

Lovely thread...

For a minute I thought there was a point in there.  But I'm not sure.

I think there is something more that can be done with general documentation of 
the current Production Ruby language.  I also realize that A) this is really 
boring and B) by the time the ink dries it is probably out of date.

That said:

I'm not at a point where I would consider it safe for me to start putting 
together "official" rDoc publications or modifying the files themselves but 
what/how does the Ruby documentation project get things done?  (probably another 
mailing but still valid here).

I've written over 5 lines of code, so that makes me something of an expert 
according to this thread.  However, 100 lines probably doesn't move me very far 
up the food chain.

But I still need docs and I spent most of last night reading the source for dbi 
trying to figure out what methods I could call and what was returned.  Glad it's 
open code, but I did find the documentation a bit lacking.

What constructive suggestions can someone provide to improve this for the community?