Re: gdm vs. kdm
- From: "Leslie Rhorer" <lrhorer@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:18:09 -0600
+ >>+ It never ceases tro amaze me how skimpy the documentation for Linux
+ >>+ is Why don't they put thghis in the Man page?
+ >
+ > Because most folks don't need it, and nobody stopped to write it
+ > down. What itches gets scratched.
+
+ Most people *DO* need it.
Most people aren't connecting to a terminal server, they're logging in
to their local machine. Until you can show me something else, I'll
stand my by original assertion: most folks don't need XDMCP, thus the
relative lack of documentation.
I was speaking more broadly of the frequent lack of detail in MAN pages,
but nonetheless, if a switch or configuration option is to be offered in a
utility, then it needs to be documented. Failing to do so a major reason
those who claim Windows to be superior to Linux make that claim.
+ machine is not a problem. If this were to be used on one of my servers
at
+ work, I woujld still probably be researching the issue.
Well, there's this:
http://tldp.org/
http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Gdm_setup
http://live.gnome.org/DocumentationProject/Join
None of which would have helped. I'm not using GDM or Gnome, and the
LDP site is mostly just a repository for the MAN pages. It's the MAN pages
of which I am primarily speaking, in the first place.
+ Perhaps more importantly, it is not my responsibility to document other
+ people's programming unless they ask me to.
It isn't your responsibility, no. But you shouldn't bitch if someone
chooses not to document their programming, either.
Oh yes, I should, and so should you. Documentation is just as important
an aspect of creating an application as writing the code, and an application
or utility with inadequate documentation should no more be tolerated than
bug-ridden software. That such may be in fact the norm is irrelvant. Only
by demanding better quality form their products will consumers ever obtain
better quality.
Frankly, I'd rather have someone *other* than the programming team
write the documentation. The documentation is likely to be more clear
and less confusing than something written by someone who groks the
program so well that the resulting documenation is...unclear because
they know what they mean, even if you and I don't.
Depending on the developer, I don't disagree. Certainly I wouldn't
expect a developer to speak many languages, for example, and asking someone
whose programming skills are superb but who speaks only Russian or Japanese
to write documentation in English, Spanish, Dutch, Arabic, etc. is just
silly. That is why I said "or to obtain the services of someone who can and
is willing to to do it for them."
As someone else noted, there's nothing wrong with Linux documentation
that a couple of good tech writers and a good editor or three can't
cure.
And it is the responsibility of the developer to engage their services.
Amything else respesents malfeasance. In the case of a MAN page for a
widely deployed *nix utility, people capable of undeertaking and willing to
undertake such a minor task for free are quite thick upon the ground. I
myself have undertaken that very thing for free on far more complex projects
than KDM.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
- Next by Date: Re: gdm vs. kdm
- Previous by thread: Re: Can we make Linux Desktop Enviroment beyond the Desktop Metaphor?
- Next by thread: Re: gdm vs. kdm
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
