From: "Michael T. Richter" Date: 2008-06-14T09:42:50+09:00 Subject: Re: A crosspost from the Perl Community --=-n9wVXf4FWQ3et7h/7eM5 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-UM+9KPD1lbEV7wR2OM5M" --=-UM+9KPD1lbEV7wR2OM5M Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 04:43 +0900, Davi Vidal wrote: > > The only complaint I can have about ruby is that the documentation coul= d > > always be improved. The Pickaxe is great, but I think a language should > > have at least a great online and up-to-date reference, similar to php, > > on the official site. > Indeed. I really need this! > rdoc & ri & irb are great, but php.net/function-name is almost perfect w= ith=20 > examples and comments and description and parameters and return values. What's the actual procedure for improving Ruby's docs? Is there a doc team? If there is, is it active? If it is, does it accept suggestions, patches and/or wholesale chapters? If so, and here's the key part, is it actually possible to contribute without a huge bureaucratic nightmare? A lot of communities fail on that last point. Is Ruby's one of them? (I am asking because I don't know, not because I think this is the case.) --=20 Michael T. Richter (GoogleTalk: ttmrichter@gmail.com) If there's one thing that computers do well, it's to make the same mistake uncountable times at inhuman speed. (Peter Coffee) --=-UM+9KPD1lbEV7wR2OM5M Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 04:43 +0900, Davi Vidal wrote: 
> The only complaint I can have about ruby is th=
at the documentation could
> always be improved. The Pickaxe is great, but =
I think a language should
> have at least a great online and up-to-date re=
ference, similar to php,
> on the official site.



	Indeed. I really need this!



	rdoc & ri & irb are great, but php.net/fun=
ction-name is almost perfect with 
examples and comments and description and parameter=
s and return values.

What's the actual procedure for improving Ruby's docs?  Is there a doc= team?  If there is, is it active?  If it is, does it accept sugg= estions, patches and/or wholesale chapters?  If so, and here's the key= part, is it actually possible to contribute without a huge bureaucratic nightmare?

A lot of communities fail on that last point.  Is Ruby's one of them?&= nbsp; (I am asking because I don't know, not because I think this is the ca= se.)

--
Michael T. Richter <ttmri= chter@gmail.com> (GoogleTalk: ttmrichter@gmail.com)
If there's one thing that computers do well, it's to make the same mista= ke uncountable times at inhuman speed. (Peter Coffee)
--=-UM+9KPD1lbEV7wR2OM5M-- --=-n9wVXf4FWQ3et7h/7eM5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBIUxQpLqyWkKVQ54QRAgrfAKDdNf1gblia9AKg5xrA/JgErbEp9wCfbEFW 3p4IrCrqm2tswzUy0IfAXf0= =2YZW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-n9wVXf4FWQ3et7h/7eM5--