Rails 2.0 is out. It''s an awesome achievement, and it has improved a lot from it''s 1.x state (I was about to list everything to make this introduction look good, but we all know what 2.0 has to offer, so I won''t =P). We have a core team, and a "not-so-core" team of regular committers. We do not, however, have a documentation team. I think Rails has grown big enough to deserve having that, and it also makes sense to have it. This is what we have today: The API: This is getting better and better, thanks to documentation patches and various upgrades through out it''s history. Also, the caboo.se API contributions are awesome. The API is an API, though, and not a sufficient resource for someone completely new to rails, and even completely new to making webapps in general. The manuals: The first thing that meets your eye when you browse http://manuals.rubyonrails.org is "Upgrading to Rails 1.0". Need I say more? ; ) Railscasts.com: Probably the most awesome beginner-ish (and free) documentation Rails has. Clean code and good practices. However, this is not a complete tutorial either, as it won''t explain how belongs_to works (which the API will explain, but the beginner doesn''t even know what belongs_to is, and will never find it there) The books: The books are also great, but they''ll get outdated soon- ish, and aren''t free. So, I''m suggesting that a separate documentation team is set up. This is my first idea for getting started with awesome documentation: railsbeginner.com (I even registered the domain because I was so extremely pleased with the idea \o/) People post their questions here. The core documentation team (which would be me (?) and [insert other members here]) would post an answer to that question, and tag/categorize the question (where a tag containing the version of rails this is regarding is important). Perhaps also even edit the question itself, in case it was written poorly. The answer should be a _real_ answer. No external references. "Look in agile web development with rails", or "read the api" aren''t allowed. The answer should be there, in it''s full, with everything needed to answer the question. If someone posts a duplicate question, the doc team will remove the post. A mail will be sent to the person asking the question, notifying him that the question was a duplicate (but stating that it was only removed because it was a duplicate - feel free to post more questions bla bla). Simple as that. Questions with answers, categorized and searchable. That way, one will get real questions. Not just questions made up by an author or whatever. And it will be ever expandable. So, let''s just get at it? I can''t find any reason not to. Also, perhaps railsbeginner.com is a stupid idea, as it limits it to beginners only. http://questions.rubyonrails.org, anyone? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> > The API is an API, though, and > not a sufficient resource for someone completely new to rails, and > even completely new to making webapps in general. >Amen! How soon we forget the difficulty of starting out in a new field :-) Right now we''ve got three main resources that help newbs learn Rails for free: the rubyonrails mailing list (bulgeoning now, perhaps past it''s usefulness), http://railsforum.com (where 97% of the good answers are by Ryan Bates), and RailsCasts (created by Ryan Bates). There used to be Rails Weenie, which worked almost exactly in the question/answer format you''re describing, but it seems to have gone the way of the wooly mammoth. So I think you''re on to something but we need to be careful not to just create another resource. We web developers tend to think that any problem can be solved with a website :-) ::Jack Danger --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
That''s a good point, really. There is no magic involved, even though it usually seems a lot like it is, at least when you just got the idea. However, I do think there''s some pretty good arguments for making a new site. This question/answer thing might sound a lot like a forum, only that this particular page won''t look like a forum at all. There''s no categories and boards, and no duplicate posts - the mod team tags stuff (the community might tag stuff as well, but the mod team needs to be nazis to make sure things are tagged "properly") and deletes duplicates. And because it''s an "official" site - at least that''s what it should be imo - you can''t just forward the problem and say "sorry, cba to answer" - the goal should be to answer all questions (unless the question is obviously dumb and breaking Rails conventions, like accessing sessions in models etc). This should ideally be a collection of pretty much all the questions people might have. You might argue that we''ll get tons of dupe posts, and half the job will be to delete those. But isn''t that OK anyway? I''m a regular on #rubyonrails (IRC), and we''re basically being google for the people there. They don''t know what to search for and stuff, so we''re interpreting their questions and giving them an api link or a google query in 2/3 of the questions. So the deleting-dupe-and- pointing-out-the-answer to dupe posters is sort a part of the service. Repeating myself here, but oh well - forums and mailing lists has no clean and awesome way of detecting dupes when you get past a certain amount of posts. Like, if someone posted a question here one year ago, I doubt anyone is arsed to find that. This is because there''s probably 10% unanswered posts, a lot of duplicates going on, and a lot of posts with 2-3 retarded answers. This is mostly due to not having nazi- moderation on dupes and such. And it''s not because users are too lazy to search or anything, they simply don''t know what (or how) to search for. So as far as I can see, this is a new concept. Not just for Rails, but open source projects in general. Anyway, new webapp or not, I hope this posting of mine would at least get a doc team running. Can''t see why not =) On Dec 13, 5:10 pm, "Jack Danger Canty" <dangeronra...@gmail.com> wrote:> > The API is an API, though, and > > not a sufficient resource for someone completely new to rails, and > > even completely new to making webapps in general. > > Amen! How soon we forget the difficulty of starting out in a new field :-) > > Right now we''ve got three main resources that help newbs learn Rails for > free: the rubyonrails mailing list (bulgeoning now, perhaps past it''s > usefulness),http://railsforum.com(where 97% of the good answers are by > Ryan Bates), and RailsCasts (created by Ryan Bates). > > There used to be Rails Weenie, which worked almost exactly in the > question/answer format you''re describing, but it seems to have gone the way > of the wooly mammoth. > > So I think you''re on to something but we need to be careful not to just > create another resource. We web developers tend to think that any problem > can be solved with a website :-) > > ::Jack Danger--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Kind of like we''ve been trying to do over at http://www.railsdocumentation.org/ to no avail? ;) It''s very hard to get people excited about doing documentation (unless you''re offering $$$). Honestly, it''s hard (it''s very difficult to step out your own frame of reference and think about to write docs for beginners through Rails masters) and it''s very time consuming (it''s probably one of the few things in Ruby development that has a "build process," that is, edit the docs, run rake doc:rails, check your output, fix things, repeat), and, on top of that, there''s very little glory in it (do you see a Rails 2.0 "documentation a day" blog series like you do with all the new features? ;)). I''d be really interested in helping assemble a group of people to work steadily on the documentation. I''ve pulled in a few people and we''ve made some contributions, but it''s never been formal and it''s never been consistent. I setup a BC but it fell to disrepair. I have a Lighthouse that we used to file tickets in that no one fixed. I''d really like to get this stuff going since I have more than enough time now to devote to something like that, but I simply haven''t seen all that much interest. As for the Q&A site, that would be cool so long as people had the time and gusto to manage it. It would be a job! (Look at the mailing list and IRC channel; think about all that being channeled into a single site that''s supposed to moderated and managed...) I''d be willing to help build it if I''m needed, but I''d (personally) rather devote my time to generating reference documentation than managing a "live resource" like that. --Jeremy On Dec 13, 2007 1:33 PM, August Lilleaas <augustlilleaas@gmail.com> wrote:> > That''s a good point, really. There is no magic involved, even though > it usually seems a lot like it is, at least when you just got the > idea. > > However, I do think there''s some pretty good arguments for making a > new site. This question/answer thing might sound a lot like a forum, > only that this particular page won''t look like a forum at all. There''s > no categories and boards, and no duplicate posts - the mod team tags > stuff (the community might tag stuff as well, but the mod team needs > to be nazis to make sure things are tagged "properly") and deletes > duplicates. And because it''s an "official" site - at least that''s what > it should be imo - you can''t just forward the problem and say "sorry, > cba to answer" - the goal should be to answer all questions (unless > the question is obviously dumb and breaking Rails conventions, like > accessing sessions in models etc). > > This should ideally be a collection of pretty much all the questions > people might have. You might argue that we''ll get tons of dupe posts, > and half the job will be to delete those. But isn''t that OK anyway? > I''m a regular on #rubyonrails (IRC), and we''re basically being google > for the people there. They don''t know what to search for and stuff, so > we''re interpreting their questions and giving them an api link or a > google query in 2/3 of the questions. So the deleting-dupe-and- > pointing-out-the-answer to dupe posters is sort a part of the service. > > Repeating myself here, but oh well - forums and mailing lists has no > clean and awesome way of detecting dupes when you get past a certain > amount of posts. Like, if someone posted a question here one year ago, > I doubt anyone is arsed to find that. This is because there''s probably > 10% unanswered posts, a lot of duplicates going on, and a lot of posts > with 2-3 retarded answers. This is mostly due to not having nazi- > moderation on dupes and such. And it''s not because users are too lazy > to search or anything, they simply don''t know what (or how) to search > for. > > So as far as I can see, this is a new concept. Not just for Rails, but > open source projects in general. > > Anyway, new webapp or not, I hope this posting of mine would at least > get a doc team running. Can''t see why not =) > > On Dec 13, 5:10 pm, "Jack Danger Canty" <dangeronra...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > The API is an API, though, and > > > not a sufficient resource for someone completely new to rails, and > > > even completely new to making webapps in general. > > > > Amen! How soon we forget the difficulty of starting out in a new field :-) > > > > Right now we''ve got three main resources that help newbs learn Rails for > > free: the rubyonrails mailing list (bulgeoning now, perhaps past it''s > > usefulness),http://railsforum.com(where 97% of the good answers are by > > Ryan Bates), and RailsCasts (created by Ryan Bates). > > > > There used to be Rails Weenie, which worked almost exactly in the > > question/answer format you''re describing, but it seems to have gone the way > > of the wooly mammoth. > > > > So I think you''re on to something but we need to be careful not to just > > create another resource. We web developers tend to think that any problem > > can be solved with a website :-) > > > > ::Jack Danger > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 03:34:45PM -0500, Jeremy McAnally wrote:> As for the Q&A site, that would be cool so long as people had the time > and gusto to manage it. It would be a job! (Look at the mailing list > and IRC channel; think about all that being channeled into a single > site that''s supposed to moderated and managed...) I''d be willing to > help build it if I''m needed, but I''d (personally) rather devote my > time to generating reference documentation than managing a "live > resource" like that.Rick Olson wrote and ran precisely such a Q&A site over at railsweenie.com or some such and it was very active for a while but I guess eventually went dark. Maybe he''d be interested in passing the code off to you and dumping the existing data if he still has it and thinks it is still relevant. Then it could be put up at railsbeginner.com or railsdocumentation.com or what have you. marcel -- Marcel Molina Jr. <marcel@vernix.org> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> Rick Olson wrote and ran precisely such a Q&A site over at railsweenie.com or > some such and it was very active for a while but I guess eventually went > dark. Maybe he''d be interested in passing the code off to you and dumping the > existing data if he still has it and thinks it is still relevant. Then it > could be put up at railsbeginner.com or railsdocumentation.com or what have > you.I was looking for help for well over a year, and eventually gave up after getting no real responses and then losing the domain :/ The data is still intact, but it''s barely more than a beast forum anymore. At that point, I''m not sure what the value is over something like railsforum then. It used to have an arbitrary point and ribbon system to sort of reward folks for helping others out though. We''re talking about moving the Mephisto wiki (which is riddled with spam) to a custom mephisto setup and appointing writers to maintain the docs. This is how prototypejs.org is setup (http://prototypejs.org/api, also with Mephisto). Ultimately though, it doesn''t matter what system you use, just that there''s an active team keeping things current. -- Rick Olson http://lighthouseapp.com http://weblog.techno-weenie.net http://mephistoblog.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Has anyone looked at what other OSS projects have done differently to enable successful doc projects created or contributed to by the community? I''m thinking in particular of the django book, and maybe also php.net. What do they do differently to address the people problems that we see in the Rails community? - Rob http://robsanheim.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
+1 on the OSS book idea. I have always felt that rails api docs are not as bad as people make it sound like. I like django style book idea. I guess irc/mailing list are good enough for question/answer. There is no point in spoon feeding. On Dec 14, 2007 7:07 AM, Rob Sanheim <rsanheim@gmail.com> wrote:> > Has anyone looked at what other OSS projects have done differently to > enable successful doc projects created or contributed to by the > community? I''m thinking in particular of the django book, and maybe > also php.net. What do they do differently to address the people > problems that we see in the Rails community? > > - Rob > http://robsanheim.com-- Cheers! - Pratik http://m.onkey.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I brought it up in a previous post, but making docs available for older rails milestones would be useful. PHP docs, for example, show what version of PHP a method was added in or is supported for. Not everyone uses the latest version of rails now. Back in the old days you''d be expected to update and use the latest rails version, but rails has entered it''s support days now. :) On Dec 14, 2007 1:28 AM, Pratik <pratiknaik@gmail.com> wrote:> > +1 on the OSS book idea. I have always felt that rails api docs are > not as bad as people make it sound like. I like django style book > idea. > > I guess irc/mailing list are good enough for question/answer. There is > no point in spoon feeding. > > On Dec 14, 2007 7:07 AM, Rob Sanheim <rsanheim@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Has anyone looked at what other OSS projects have done differently to > > enable successful doc projects created or contributed to by the > > community? I''m thinking in particular of the django book, and maybe > > also php.net. What do they do differently to address the people > > problems that we see in the Rails community? > > > > - Rob > > http://robsanheim.com > -- > Cheers! > - Pratik > http://m.onkey.org > > > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 2007, at 8:28 AM, Pratik wrote:> I have always felt that rails api docs are not as bad as people make > it sound like.We''re not writing a manual for a microwave that doesn''t change after someone decides on the specs and thinks about the user interface, this is documentation for a constantly evolving framework. I think we should keep the documentation close to the source and preferably in the source where you''re constantly reminded that any patch should also mean an update to the surrounding documentation. For external documentation you need either intimate knowledge of way the source works, or use the current API docs as a source. That sounds like a maintenance hell to me. Higher level documentation could be sustainable because it would only describe concepts, and not implementation details (.ie an explanation what ActiveRecord is and what problems it solves.) Higher level documentation is mostly useful for newcomers and they like to dive in headfirst, not spend a whole day reading about architecture. Long story short: good API docs, good examples, screencasts, blog posts and a forum/mailinglist seem like the way to go and I think we''re already pretty well supplied in those areas. Manfred --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
But it may not get right feel of the framework for a newcomer, and as long as Rails is opinionated software, Djangish kind of a book may be a good idea to fill in this gap. On 14 дек. 2007, at 10:02, Manfred Stienstra wrote:> > Long story short: good API docs, good examples, screencasts, blog > posts and a forum/mailinglist seem like the way to go and I think > we''re already pretty well supplied in those areas. > > ManfredMK --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I disagree that a forum and/or mailing list rocks - it''s good enough, but it''s not awesome. Having a system where questions are tagged and moderated is very different. Also, keep in mind what kind of questions people might have. In IRC, some guy wondered why restful_authentication didn''t work. He had installed the plugin, and login/logout worked, but "a users could still see the posts other users have made". When I told him that he needed to change the finders in the controller to find the posts from the current user (current_user.posts), he said "that didn''t work" - because he hadn''t set up a Post.belongs_to :user and User.has_many :posts. He had no idea on how to achieve this. You could say that this was pretty retarded, and I would agree. He simply didn''t understand anything about how rails works, and when I told him that he needed to set up the associations, he came back to me and asked why he got all these error messages - he hadn''t added a user_id column to the posts table, and didn''t understand why he had to do that. Still, after some moderations and tagging, and with an added write-up on how to do what he wanted to do - authenticate users and then scope finders by the current user - would be a good resource for rails beginners. You could argue that it''s not up to the core team to document usage of plugins, but then again why not? Most Rails books include some plugin usage, and pretty much all rails apps are using plugins anyway. I could just get at it, and make this railsbeginners.com, but that''s pointless because of the reasons mentioned above - we don''t need another one-man doc site, we need a doc team, listed on rubyonrails.com/core. On Dec 14, 9:38 am, Michael Klishin <michael.s.klishin.li...@gmail.com> wrote:> But it may not get right feel of the framework for a newcomer, and as > long as Rails is opinionated software, Djangish kind of a book may be > a good idea to fill in this gap. > > On 14 дек. 2007, at 10:02, Manfred Stienstra wrote: > > > > > Long story short: good API docs, good examples, screencasts, blog > > posts and a forum/mailinglist seem like the way to go and I think > > we''re already pretty well supplied in those areas. > > > Manfred > > MK--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Am 14.12.2007 um 08:28 schrieb Pratik:> +1 on the OSS book idea. I have always felt that rails api docs are > not as bad as people make it sound like. I like django style book > idea. > > I guess irc/mailing list are good enough for question/answer. There is > no point in spoon feeding.I also like the book idea and I tend to agree with the latter. I''d like to throw in, though, that although Rails has pretty good resources for many topics, they are really hard to find sometimes when you don''t exactly know what to search for. I''ve been mulling over a distributed mechanism to supply that need the other day. Like: mark up content (tutorials, walkthroughs, q&a) with some kind of suited Microformat "in the wild", have a pub/sub mechanism in place and display the resources at central places, which also might be moderated/gardened by volunteers. Apps like railsweenie could add the necessary Microformats (or whatever conventions) automatically. Maybe this might be a more powerful approach than creating yet another walled community site? -- sven fuchs svenfuchs@artweb-design.de artweb design http://www.artweb-design.de grünberger 65 + 49 (0) 30 - 47 98 69 96 (phone) d-10245 berlin + 49 (0) 171 - 35 20 38 4 (mobile) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 2007, at 11:21, Sven Fuchs wrote:> I''d like to throw in, though, that although Rails has pretty good > resources for many topics, they are really hard to find sometimes when > you don''t exactly know what to search for.You go to google, type in "ruby on rails", click on "documentation" and voila: http://www.rubyonrails.org/docs I think this lists a good number of resources to get you started. Manfred --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
There is no single (and free) resource one can use. And I don''t think rubyonrails.org/docs is good enough. We don''t need articles or (costly) books, we need one website (yes, one. one one one. 1) where you can figure out what you need to figure out to get started. Which should be supported and maintained by a core documentation team, that also makes sure the information on that webpage is kept up to date. At least tagged as "outdated" if it''s not. With that said, I really like Sven Fuchs'' idea. He has a good point - there''s a lot of information out there, it''s just hard to find it. And hard to know if it''s outdated. Having a system which simply is a bunch of tagged and categorized links sounds like a very good idea - that means the dev core team doesn''t have to actually write stuff, just categorize it. On Dec 14, 11:25 am, Manfred Stienstra <manf...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 14, 2007, at 11:21, Sven Fuchs wrote: > > > I''d like to throw in, though, that although Rails has pretty good > > resources for many topics, they are really hard to find sometimes when > > you don''t exactly know what to search for. > > You go to google, type in "ruby on rails", click on "documentation" > and voila: > > http://www.rubyonrails.org/docs > > I think this lists a good number of resources to get you started. > > Manfred--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
What''s wrong with just directing new people to "Agile Web Development with Rails"? So long as you keep the API documentation up to date, I think professional, fulltime writers and educators can write better introductory documentation than any of us. On Dec 14, 2:02 am, August Lilleaas <augustlille...@gmail.com> wrote:> I disagree that a forum and/or mailing list rocks - it''s good enough, > but it''s not awesome. Having a system where questions are tagged and > moderated is very different. > > Also, keep in mind what kind of questions people might have. In IRC, > some guy wondered why restful_authentication didn''t work. He had > installed the plugin, and login/logout worked, but "a users could > still see the posts other users have made". When I told him that he > needed to change the finders in the controller to find the posts from > the current user (current_user.posts), he said "that didn''t work" - > because he hadn''t set up a Post.belongs_to :user and > User.has_many :posts. He had no idea on how to achieve this. > > You could say that this was pretty retarded, and I would agree. He > simply didn''t understand anything about how rails works, and when I > told him that he needed to set up the associations, he came back to me > and asked why he got all these error messages - he hadn''t added a > user_id column to the posts table, and didn''t understand why he had to > do that. Still, after some moderations and tagging, and with an added > write-up on how to do what he wanted to do - authenticate users and > then scope finders by the current user - would be a good resource for > rails beginners. You could argue that it''s not up to the core team to > document usage of plugins, but then again why not? Most Rails books > include some plugin usage, and pretty much all rails apps are using > plugins anyway. > > I could just get at it, and make this railsbeginners.com, but that''s > pointless because of the reasons mentioned above - we don''t need > another one-man doc site, we need a doc team, listed on > rubyonrails.com/core. > > On Dec 14, 9:38 am, Michael Klishin > > <michael.s.klishin.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > But it may not get right feel of the framework for a newcomer, and as > > long as Rails is opinionated software, Djangish kind of a book may be > > a good idea to fill in this gap. > > > On 14 дек. 2007, at 10:02, Manfred Stienstra wrote: > > > > Long story short: good API docs, good examples, screencasts, blog > > > posts and a forum/mailinglist seem like the way to go and I think > > > we''re already pretty well supplied in those areas. > > > > Manfred > > > MK--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 2007, at 11:25, Manfred Stienstra wrote:> On Dec 14, 2007, at 11:21, Sven Fuchs wrote: >> I''d like to throw in, though, that although Rails has pretty good >> resources for many topics, they are really hard to find sometimes >> when you don''t exactly know what to search for. > > You go to google, type in "ruby on rails", click on "documentation" > and voila: > > http://www.rubyonrails.org/docs > > I think this lists a good number of resources to get you started.Also, the very first page of the API documentation starts out with a perfectly fine introduction that should get any halfway decent developer started: http://api.rubyonrails.com/ Kind regards, Thijs -- Fingertips - http://www.fngtps.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Long story short, it is a bit outdated after 2.0 release. We don''t want 2.0 features being discovered by masses by the time of 3.0 release, right? On 14 дек. 2007, at 12:42, Sandofsky wrote:> > What''s wrong with just directing new people to "Agile Web Development > with Rails"? > > So long as you keep the API documentation up to date, I think > professional, fulltime writers and educators can write better > introductory documentation than any of us.MK --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
It doesn''t matter how much we argue back and forth on this. Newbies has a problem getting started with rails without having to pay for a book. That is a fact. It doesn''t matter if the API introduction page "should" get them going, or that they "should" find what they need by googling - they are, as of now, usually not able to get started easily (without paying for it), and that''s the problem that needs to be fixed by a core doc team. On Dec 14, 12:03 pm, Michael Klishin <michael.s.klishin.li...@gmail.com> wrote:> Long story short, it is a bit outdated after 2.0 release. We don''t > want 2.0 features being discovered by masses by the time of 3.0 > release, right? > > On 14 дек. 2007, at 12:42, Sandofsky wrote: > > > > > What''s wrong with just directing new people to "Agile Web Development > > with Rails"? > > > So long as you keep the API documentation up to date, I think > > professional, fulltime writers and educators can write better > > introductory documentation than any of us. > > MK--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 2007, at 12:19, August Lilleaas wrote:> [...] they are, as of now, usually not able to get started easily > (without paying for it), and that''s the problem that needs to be > fixed by a core doc team.Well, what''s holding you back? Start writing! :) Kind regards, Thijs -- Fingertips - http://www.fngtps.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Ricks point is also important - how we do it isn''t _that_ important (even though I''d say a forum isn''t the way to go), the important thing is that we''re a group of people that agrees on something. So, say that Rails is to get an official documentation team. Whose decision would that be? DHH? Anyone in the core team? It would be nice with an opinion from the person/people that can actually decide wether or not to get an official team running. On Dec 14, 1:10 pm, Thijs van der Vossen <t.vandervos...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 14, 2007, at 12:19, August Lilleaas wrote: > > > [...] they are, as of now, usually not able to get started easily > > (without paying for it), and that''s the problem that needs to be > > fixed by a core doc team. > > Well, what''s holding you back? Start writing! :) > > Kind regards, > Thijs > > -- > Fingertips -http://www.fngtps.com--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> > Well, what''s holding you back? Start writing! :) >I think he''s looking for official support. And I think he''s right in that yet another third party documentation effort isn''t what is required to solve the issues he''s mentioned. The documentation effort needs to be official in order to gain wide traction and to be seen as the one go-to-place for help. Rails already has documentation spread across thousands of articles all over the net, increasing the amount of dispersed documentation does not help one little bit. That doesn''t mean that the current core team needs to do the documenting, only that some people committed to churning out great documentation need to do so with official blessing and sanctioning, on the official Rails webpage. My two cents, anyway. Regards, Tomas Jogin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 2007, at 14:12, Tomas Jogin wrote:> That doesn''t mean that the current core team needs to do the > documenting, only that some people committed to churning out great > documentation need to do so with official blessing and sanctioning, > on the official Rails webpage.They can do so now by creating documentation patches. The API documentation is currently the only ''official'' Rails documentation in existence. Kind regards, Thijs -- Fingertips - http://www.fngtps.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
The fact that an API is considered official documentation is a bit alarming, aint it? On Dec 14, 2:23 pm, Thijs van der Vossen <t.vandervos...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 14, 2007, at 14:12, Tomas Jogin wrote: > > > That doesn''t mean that the current core team needs to do the > > documenting, only that some people committed to churning out great > > documentation need to do so with official blessing and sanctioning, > > on the official Rails webpage. > > They can do so now by creating documentation patches. The API > documentation is currently the only ''official'' Rails documentation in > existence. > > Kind regards, > Thijs > > -- > Fingertips -http://www.fngtps.com--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 2007, at 14:50, August Lilleaas wrote:> The fact that an API is considered official documentation is a bit > alarming, aint it?Why exactly? -- Fingertips - http://www.fngtps.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Because of the reasons mentioned above. An API is a reference tool, and has a tremendously steep learning curve if you don''t know anything about Rails. The API is indeed documentation, but it''s not sufficient for a beginner. So, the official documentation is no good for beginners. That''s my main concern. On Dec 14, 2:51 pm, Thijs van der Vossen <t.vandervos...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 14, 2007, at 14:50, August Lilleaas wrote: > > > The fact that an API is considered official documentation is a bit > > alarming, aint it? > > Why exactly? > > -- > Fingertips -http://www.fngtps.com--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Because it's $30-40? I always hated the fact that to really get into Rails I had to shell out for a book. Every time I looked for narrative documentation of any sort, I was always pointed to a random blog or the book (usually the latter). It actually sort of instilled this weird, totally unfounded distrust of DHH in me for a while because his name was on the cover, so it seemed like a ploy to make money. Stupid? Yes. Uncommon? I don't think so. All that's to say: I think it's dumb to have to spend a decent sum of money to really be able to use Rails. As for starting a book, there's the start to an open source book on Rails here: http://www.railsdocumentation.org/book.html It's out of date and not a lot of content at this point, but I'd love to get a group of people working around that to get it into shape. Maintenance wouldn't be horrible if we tried to keep up with the major Rails releases (1.1, 1.2, 2.0, etc., not 2.0.1 necessarily). It's written in Markdown so far, so it shouldn't be horrible to get a lot of people working on it. Anyone interested in working on that or making concerted efforts on the API docs (or anything else)? Ping me off list, on IRC (in #rails-doc), or find me at a conference. :) I've got a Basecamp, Lighthouse, blah blah blah to coordinate all the efforts. --Jeremy On Dec 14, 2007 5:42 AM, Sandofsky <sandofsky@gmail.com> wrote:> > What's wrong with just directing new people to "Agile Web Development > with Rails"? > > So long as you keep the API documentation up to date, I think > professional, fulltime writers and educators can write better > introductory documentation than any of us. > > > On Dec 14, 2:02 am, August Lilleaas <augustlille...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I disagree that a forum and/or mailing list rocks - it's good enough, > > but it's not awesome. Having a system where questions are tagged and > > moderated is very different. > > > > Also, keep in mind what kind of questions people might have. In IRC, > > some guy wondered why restful_authentication didn't work. He had > > installed the plugin, and login/logout worked, but "a users could > > still see the posts other users have made". When I told him that he > > needed to change the finders in the controller to find the posts from > > the current user (current_user.posts), he said "that didn't work" - > > because he hadn't set up a Post.belongs_to :user and > > User.has_many :posts. He had no idea on how to achieve this. > > > > You could say that this was pretty retarded, and I would agree. He > > simply didn't understand anything about how rails works, and when I > > told him that he needed to set up the associations, he came back to me > > and asked why he got all these error messages - he hadn't added a > > user_id column to the posts table, and didn't understand why he had to > > do that. Still, after some moderations and tagging, and with an added > > write-up on how to do what he wanted to do - authenticate users and > > then scope finders by the current user - would be a good resource for > > rails beginners. You could argue that it's not up to the core team to > > document usage of plugins, but then again why not? Most Rails books > > include some plugin usage, and pretty much all rails apps are using > > plugins anyway. > > > > I could just get at it, and make this railsbeginners.com, but that's > > pointless because of the reasons mentioned above - we don't need > > another one-man doc site, we need a doc team, listed on > > rubyonrails.com/core. > > > > On Dec 14, 9:38 am, Michael Klishin > > > > <michael.s.klishin.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > But it may not get right feel of the framework for a newcomer, and as > > > long as Rails is opinionated software, Djangish kind of a book may be > > > a good idea to fill in this gap. > > > > > On 14 дек. 2007, at 10:02, Manfred Stienstra wrote: > > > > > > Long story short: good API docs, good examples, screencasts, blog > > > > posts and a forum/mailinglist seem like the way to go and I think > > > > we're already pretty well supplied in those areas. > > > > > > Manfred > > > > > MK > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
The Django book is interesting, but (a) it was written by the creators of Django and (b) it hasn''t been updated in some time because they are working on the dead tree version or something (which is actually out of date before it even hit the shelf heh). I loved the model though; the way they set the site up was awesome. --Jeremy On Dec 14, 2007 2:07 AM, Rob Sanheim <rsanheim@gmail.com> wrote:> > Has anyone looked at what other OSS projects have done differently to > enable successful doc projects created or contributed to by the > community? I''m thinking in particular of the django book, and maybe > also php.net. What do they do differently to address the people > problems that we see in the Rails community? > > - Rob > http://robsanheim.com > > > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 8:26 am, "Jeremy McAnally" <jeremymcana...@gmail.com> wrote:> Because it''s $30-40? I always hated the fact that to really get into > Rails I had to shell out for a book.[snip]> All that''s to say: I think it''s dumb to have to spend a decent sum of > money to really be able to use Rails.I totally sympathize, but actually i''ve only learned from books my entire career. I''ve never really been about to use "official" docs for much more than reference. That''s been true since I first learned BASIC, then Pascal, then C++, then .NET, now Ruby. I''m usually glad to spend $100 on books for something new, because it pays itself back. I think the reason that official docs are not as good is apparent. As I''m sure you know, being a good writer is different than being a good developer. That''s why I''ve always found it odd that there are all these appeals for developers to help write documentation. Developers can maybe write reference material or rdoc-style docs. They can''t necessarily teach or explain well. In the same way that most Rails programmers are also not good web designers.> As for starting a book, there''s the start to an open source book on > Rails here:http://www.railsdocumentation.org/book.html > > It''s out of date and not a lot of content at this point[snip] Exactly my point. :-) Unless there are people who love to write, are good at writing, and get some kind of reward (monetary, recognition, or otherwise), this is doomed to happen. It''s no one''s fault, it''s just how it is. Some developers are good at it (like you), most are not. Look at the Rails blogosphere. The good ones tend to be by developers who also write well and teach well. And that''s why it''s also hard to have a successful technical blog. My two cents, anyway. Jeff softiesonrails.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I wouldn''t normally jump into a rails-core discussion, but what I''m working on seems relevant to this thread. My colleague Christopher Haupt and I are deep into building a portal site to serve Ruby on Rails developers at www.BuildingWebApps.com. We''re going to be providing annotated links to all the key content on the web related to Rails, and we''ll have quite a few of our own articles as well. We''d be thrilled to work with the core team to make this as helpful for the community as it can be. We''re also started the LearningRails podcast (www.LearningRails.com), which I think will be a great resource for people new to the platform, especially if they come from a traditional web background rather than a computer science background. One distinction that tends to get muddled in these discussions is that between documentation and tutorials. The Rails API documents are fine as far as they go, but they are API documentation, not tutorials, and they should not be expected to be the way new users learn the platform. (That said, they could use a little more explanatory text in many cases.) Tutorials are a different beast. (Obie Fernandez''s new The Rails Way book, which is really outstanding by the way, is interesting because it sits more on the fence than other works: it is both documentation and tutorial.) We''ll be creating a lot of tutorial content, but will be pointing to other places for documentation. Michael Slater www.BuildingWebApps.com P.S. In case you''re wondering if this is another flash-in-the-pan site that will fade once the developers find more paying work, don''t worry. This is a real business venture with (a little) funding and a (small) dedicated staff. How can we do this when all the content is free? We''re offering seminars, which will be money-makers, and eventually we''ll have some premium content (such as video tutorials). And the bigger picture here is that we''re building a platform to organize the knowledge of any community. We''re starting with the Rails community because it''s the one we''re part of and one for which we see big opportunities to make a contribution. But our long-term business plan is to make money by offering our platform for other knowledge domains. On Dec 14, 5:51 am, Thijs van der Vossen <t.vandervos...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 14, 2007, at 14:50, August Lilleaas wrote: > > > The fact that an API is considered official documentation is a bit > > alarming, aint it? > > Why exactly? > > -- > Fingertips -http://www.fngtps.com--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Honestly, I don''t think we need to go out and create another documentation project. There have been many and to me that is the problem. If those who want to be part of documenting rails could come together as one and work as a team (documentation core team or what have you), that would be awesome. The same story keeps being retold: "I started a documentation project, asked for help, after such and such time, received none and the site went dark". Something to think about there. My suggestion would be to pull together and work on Jeremy''s already existing project, instead of going out and trying to, again, create a doc project. Also, we could just write our own app for handling the documentation project, providing such features as the django book or what not. With pdf-writer, it''d be easy to spit out pdf versions of chapters or the whole book. I''d rather see, and perhaps be part of, something like this than see another doc project created and hear later on that it too failed because no one joined it (instead they went out and created their own). Jeremy McAnally wrote:> The Django book is interesting, but (a) it was written by the creators > of Django and (b) it hasn''t been updated in some time because they are > working on the dead tree version or something (which is actually out > of date before it even hit the shelf heh). > > I loved the model though; the way they set the site up was awesome. > > --Jeremy > > On Dec 14, 2007 2:07 AM, Rob Sanheim <rsanheim@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> > > > > -- > http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ > > My books: > Ruby in Practice > http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ > > My free Ruby e-book > http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ > > My blogs: > http://www.mrneighborly.com/ > http://www.rubyinpractice.com/-- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Dec 14, 11:25 am, Manfred Stienstra <manf...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 14, 2007, at 11:21, Sven Fuchs wrote: > > > I''d like to throw in, though, that although Rails has pretty good > > resources for many topics, they are really hard to find sometimes when > > you don''t exactly know what to search for. > > You go to google, type in "ruby on rails", click on "documentation" > and voila: > > http://www.rubyonrails.org/docs > > I think this lists a good number of resources to get you started.Manfred, that page is a mess, with links that don''t work, documentation more than 2 years old and references to sites (howtos and manuals) that are incomplete or a complete mess. It''s absolutely impossible to know if any of the howtos are even relevant anymore because there are no dates on anything and like August said, one of the first manuals is how to migrate to rails 1.0?! On top of that, the really usefull documentation is scattered around hundreds of different blogs which are extremely difficult to find unless you know exactly what you''re looking for. It''s almost as if finding documentation is the initiation you go through in order to have the priviledge of using rails. We''re moving on to rails 2.0 with new conventions and new ways of doing things and yet new developers are going to start from the pre-1.0 days and progress to rails 2.0 as they stumble upon information. How is a new developer supposed to know that REST is the current convention, or even explain why rails chose REST? I only found this out because I just happened to watch DHH''s keynote at the 2006 railsconf. What about plugins that are outdated (acts_as_authenticated or login_generator)? Or what different pagination plugins are offered and how they''re different, etc. There''s just no way the current documentation situation is adequate. Scott> > Manfred--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
For the record, the manuals are being worked on. :) They are in a sad state, to be sure. --Jeremy On Dec 15, 2007 12:02 PM, Scott <scott.br@gmail.com> wrote:> > On Dec 14, 11:25 am, Manfred Stienstra <manf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Dec 14, 2007, at 11:21, Sven Fuchs wrote: > > > > > I''d like to throw in, though, that although Rails has pretty good > > > resources for many topics, they are really hard to find sometimes when > > > you don''t exactly know what to search for. > > > > You go to google, type in "ruby on rails", click on "documentation" > > and voila: > > > > http://www.rubyonrails.org/docs > > > > I think this lists a good number of resources to get you started. > > Manfred, that page is a mess, with links that don''t work, > documentation more than 2 years old and references to sites (howtos > and manuals) that are incomplete or a complete mess. It''s absolutely > impossible to know if any of the howtos are even relevant anymore > because there are no dates on anything and like August said, one of > the first manuals is how to migrate to rails 1.0?! > > On top of that, the really usefull documentation is scattered around > hundreds of different blogs which are extremely difficult to find > unless you know exactly what you''re looking for. It''s almost as if > finding documentation is the initiation you go through in order to > have the priviledge of using rails. We''re moving on to rails 2.0 with > new conventions and new ways of doing things and yet new developers > are going to start from the pre-1.0 days and progress to rails 2.0 as > they stumble upon information. > > How is a new developer supposed to know that REST is the current > convention, or even explain why rails chose REST? I only found this > out because I just happened to watch DHH''s keynote at the 2006 > railsconf. What about plugins that are outdated > (acts_as_authenticated or login_generator)? Or what different > pagination plugins are offered and how they''re different, etc. > > There''s just no way the current documentation situation is adequate. > > Scott > > > > > > Manfred > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:02:48 -0800, Rick Olson wrote:> We''re talking about moving the Mephisto wiki (which is riddled with > spam) to a custom mephisto setup and appointing writers to maintain > the docs.I feel like the Rails wiki plus Jeremy''s project could help a lot of this. But - let''s be honest - the Rails wiki is just utterly useless. I can''t remember the last time I even bothered looking at it before (or after) Googling - or even debugging. I''m gonna make another in a series of unpopular suggestions: MediaWiki. Now, keep in mind: I hate MediaWiki. I hate its syntax, I hate its feel, I hate its complexity. I hate that it''s not written in Ruby. But you know what? Wikipedia''s freaking awesome. And whatever it needs, MediaWiki has. It''s got despamming, it''s got authentication, it''s got terrific history tools, fancy templates, etc. etc. There''s a syntax-highlighting plugin for it, too. There''s even a Textile plugin. And the article/talk page dichotomy would solve one big problem of the Rails wiki. Wikis are particularly handy because - at least from my POV - you spend huge amounts of time on a problem or question when you''re working your way through it, and then you never think about it again. That''s why we have all these beginners asking the same questions, and all the experts wondering why people keep asking. Wikis are a very handy way of working on a problem while you''re thinking about it, and organizing your thoughts later. MediaWiki has two additional benefits: Huge numbers of people are already familiar with how to use it (thanks to Wikipedia), and there are a bunch of automated tools that work with it. What would it take for rails-core to even consider such a thing? -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I believe that the ruse project is in use on RubyGarden now (not positive). It''s written in Ruby and offers a lot of the features you mention. It seems that all of the web pages related to it or using it are down at the moment, but maybe they''ll get them back up soon. :) --Jeremy On Dec 17, 2007 9:47 PM, Jay Levitt <jay+news@jay.fm> wrote:> > On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:02:48 -0800, Rick Olson wrote: > > > We''re talking about moving the Mephisto wiki (which is riddled with > > spam) to a custom mephisto setup and appointing writers to maintain > > the docs. > > I feel like the Rails wiki plus Jeremy''s project could help a lot of this. > > But - let''s be honest - the Rails wiki is just utterly useless. I can''t > remember the last time I even bothered looking at it before (or after) > Googling - or even debugging. > > I''m gonna make another in a series of unpopular suggestions: > > MediaWiki. > > Now, keep in mind: I hate MediaWiki. I hate its syntax, I hate its feel, I > hate its complexity. I hate that it''s not written in Ruby. > > But you know what? Wikipedia''s freaking awesome. And whatever it needs, > MediaWiki has. > > It''s got despamming, it''s got authentication, it''s got terrific history > tools, fancy templates, etc. etc. There''s a syntax-highlighting plugin for > it, too. There''s even a Textile plugin. And the article/talk page > dichotomy would solve one big problem of the Rails wiki. > > Wikis are particularly handy because - at least from my POV - you spend > huge amounts of time on a problem or question when you''re working your way > through it, and then you never think about it again. That''s why we have > all these beginners asking the same questions, and all the experts > wondering why people keep asking. Wikis are a very handy way of working on > a problem while you''re thinking about it, and organizing your thoughts > later. > > MediaWiki has two additional benefits: Huge numbers of people are already > familiar with how to use it (thanks to Wikipedia), and there are a bunch of > automated tools that work with it. > > What would it take for rails-core to even consider such a thing? > > -- > Jay Levitt | > Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they > Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. > http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer > > > > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 00:31:39 -0500, Jeremy McAnally wrote:> I believe that the ruse project is in use on RubyGarden now (not > positive). It''s written in Ruby and offers a lot of the features you > mention. > > It seems that all of the web pages related to it or using it are down > at the moment, but maybe they''ll get them back up soon. :)See, that''s what I''m saying... :) -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On 12/17/07, Jay Levitt <jay+news@jay.fm> wrote:> > On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:02:48 -0800, Rick Olson wrote: > > > We''re talking about moving the Mephisto wiki (which is riddled with > > spam) to a custom mephisto setup and appointing writers to maintain > > the docs. > > I feel like the Rails wiki plus Jeremy''s project could help a lot of this. > > But - let''s be honest - the Rails wiki is just utterly useless. I can''t > remember the last time I even bothered looking at it before (or after) > Googling - or even debugging. > > I''m gonna make another in a series of unpopular suggestions: > > MediaWiki. > > Now, keep in mind: I hate MediaWiki. I hate its syntax, I hate its feel, I > hate its complexity. I hate that it''s not written in Ruby. > > But you know what? Wikipedia''s freaking awesome. And whatever it needs, > MediaWiki has. > > It''s got despamming, it''s got authentication, it''s got terrific history > tools, fancy templates, etc. etc. There''s a syntax-highlighting plugin for > it, too. There''s even a Textile plugin. And the article/talk page > dichotomy would solve one big problem of the Rails wiki. > > Wikis are particularly handy because - at least from my POV - you spend > huge amounts of time on a problem or question when you''re working your way > through it, and then you never think about it again. That''s why we have > all these beginners asking the same questions, and all the experts > wondering why people keep asking. Wikis are a very handy way of working on > a problem while you''re thinking about it, and organizing your thoughts > later. > > MediaWiki has two additional benefits: Huge numbers of people are already > familiar with how to use it (thanks to Wikipedia), and there are a bunch of > automated tools that work with it. > > What would it take for rails-core to even consider such a thing?I just wonder how much of Wikipedia''s usefulness is due to the software, and how much is due to the community that keeps everything tidy. At any rate, I think mediawiki''s worth a shot. Go for it. -- Rick Olson http://lighthouseapp.com http://weblog.techno-weenie.net http://mephistoblog.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:07:39 -0800, Rick Olson wrote:> I just wonder how much of Wikipedia''s usefulness is due to the > software, and how much is due to the community that keeps everything > tidy.Oh,a huge part of it''s the community, definitely. Like any large, general-purpose community, Wikipedia''s grown its own set of Neighborhood Watch types... which is sometimes good, and sometimes bad! I just meant that sometimes it''s better to grab something off the shelf where you know you''re NOT the most demanding customer on the bleeding edge. Even if you CAN do better rolling your own, doesn''t mean you will, or that it''s the best use of your time.. my list of "programs I''m not buying/using because I know I can write something better" has topped off at about 50 these days..> At any rate, I think mediawiki''s worth a shot. Go for it.Oh, I will, Rick Olson. I will indeed. Er, I mean, anyone know where I can get a DB dump of the i2 wiki? -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
August Lilleaas wrote:> Because of the reasons mentioned above. An API is a reference tool, > and has a tremendously steep learning curve if you don''t know anything > about Rails. The API is indeed documentation, but it''s not sufficient > for a beginner. So, the official documentation is no good for > beginners. That''s my main concern. > > On Dec 14, 2:51 pm, Thijs van der Vossen <t.vandervos...@gmail.com>August, I agree that a core doc team is an excellent idea. But it''s also great that other sites would provide this too. That would mean that people could go to whatever site they find more easily(they are n00b''s after all ;) ) or like better. Plus content could be copied back and forth if it was worthwhile and fit both styles. www.rubyonrails/docs is the probably the first place people look, and pointing at an API does look really bad. Maybe, starting something on that railsbeginner domain and hoping to get it moved to rails/docs(/beginner ?) or linked to from there would be a good way to get people interested. Especially as this has been a fairly well received post. PM once you know what you are doing with improving documentation. I''d like to get involved. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Michael Slater wrote:> My colleague Christopher Haupt and I are deep into building a portal > site to serve Ruby on Rails developers at www.BuildingWebApps.com. > We''re going to be providing annotated links to all the key content on > the web related to Rails, and we''ll have quite a few of our own > articles as well. We''d be thrilled to work with the core team to make > this as helpful for the community as it can be. > > We''re also started the LearningRails podcast (www.LearningRails.com), > which I think will be a great resource for people new to the platform, > especially if they come from a traditional web background rather than > a computer science background. >This looks pretty good. I saw the other thing on lighthouse: http://railsdocs.lighthouseapp.com/projects/2637 They''ve got a pretty good book together there. And there''s a decent amount of stuff on the rails wiki too. It just looks like this stuff needs to be assembled into one official site on rubyonrails.org. A good core doc team could not only do this, but also keep it up to date as new stuff happens. And fill in obscure things that are only in blogs. I also think that documenting the more popular plugins might be in our interest if the developers of those aren''t doing it. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Anthony Kelly wrote:> This looks pretty good. I saw the other thing on lighthouse: > http://railsdocs.lighthouseapp.com/projects/2637Oops I meant: http://www.railsdocumentation.org/book.html It wasn''t on lighthouse, that one never took off. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Yeah we moved all the book work over to the Basecamp. I think we''re keeping the core work there and then we''ll handle tickets, issues, and other input through Lighthouse. We''ll hopefully have some more information soon (we''re hacking out an outline and such at present). --Jeremy On Jan 2, 2008 5:28 PM, Anthony Kelly <ruby-forum-incoming@andreas-s.net> wrote:> > Anthony Kelly wrote: > > This looks pretty good. I saw the other thing on lighthouse: > > http://railsdocs.lighthouseapp.com/projects/2637 > Oops I meant: > http://www.railsdocumentation.org/book.html > It wasn''t on lighthouse, that one never took off. > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Jeremy McAnally wrote:> Yeah we moved all the book work over to the Basecamp. I think we''re > keeping the core work there and then we''ll handle tickets, issues, and > other input through Lighthouse. > > We''ll hopefully have some more information soon (we''re hacking out an > outline and such at present). > > --JeremyOh, OK, awesome. Well, I''m sure that work would translate over pretty easily if they did set up a core doc team. I know a lot of people complain that obscure features can only be found on random blogs, and that those don''t ever get maintained. I''m kind of excited that there are other people out there who would like to see rails documentation getting maintained by the community. :) Anthony -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
The wiki has some places for users to look, though they aren''t maintained. Would it be enough to update these and push for links to them from the front page? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> So, say that Rails is to get an official documentation team. Whose > decision would that be? DHH? Anyone in the core team? It would be nice > with an opinion from the person/people that can actually decide wether > or not to get an official team running.I think the best way around this is just to do something cool and once you''ve done something, you seek to get that elevated to official status. Say you do an online book that''s really great. That''d be wonderful and could well live under the rubyonrails.org site if it''s awesome. The same with any other type of documentation, really. That way we don''t bestow "official" status to a group of people with good intentions who then never get around to actually doing the work (and at the same time discourage anyone else gunning for the same slot from getting to work). This is especially prudent if this is to be a comparison to Rails Core. That group has its members picked from people who actually did something. Not from people who said they would do something. I think that''s a good model to follow. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
DHH wrote:> That way we don''t bestow "official" status to a group of people with > good intentions who then never get around to actually doing the work > (and at the same time discourage anyone else gunning for the same slot > from getting to work). > > This is especially prudent if this is to be a comparison to Rails > Core. That group has its members picked from people who actually did > something. Not from people who said they would do something. I think > that''s a good model to follow.This sounds very fair... Who''s up for it? And what should ''it'' be? railsbeginner.com? Neighborhood Watch for the wiki? Something else? Either way let''s get organized. Suggestion for a name: ''Ruby on Rails: Documentation Taskforce''. Well, anyway, let''s agree on one and then create at least a google group to get things together. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
There is already a considerable group of us laboring on documentation. We have a Basecamp if you''d like access, and a mailing list (I think; if not, we need one). That goes for anyone else also. :) --Jeremy On Jan 4, 2008 5:09 PM, Anthony Kelly <ruby-forum-incoming@andreas-s.net> wrote:> > DHH wrote: > > That way we don''t bestow "official" status to a group of people with > > good intentions who then never get around to actually doing the work > > (and at the same time discourage anyone else gunning for the same slot > > from getting to work). > > > > This is especially prudent if this is to be a comparison to Rails > > Core. That group has its members picked from people who actually did > > something. Not from people who said they would do something. I think > > that''s a good model to follow. > > This sounds very fair... Who''s up for it? And what should ''it'' be? > railsbeginner.com? Neighborhood Watch for the wiki? Something else? > Either way let''s get organized. Suggestion for a name: ''Ruby on Rails: > Documentation Taskforce''. Well, anyway, let''s agree on one and then > create at least a google group to get things together. > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I still have around $7,000 from the caboose doc project fundraiser to support a decent effort to improve rails documentation. Now that we are post 2.0 I think it is time again to find a worthy effort to fund. Suggestions welcome! There is currently a google group for ruby on rails documentation. It''s dormant. Feel free to contribute. ________________ Courtenay 310) 294-4026 @(o..O)@ On Jan 4, 2008, at 8:27 PM, "Jeremy McAnally" <jeremymcanally@gmail.com> wrote:> > There is already a considerable group of us laboring on documentation. > We have a Basecamp if you''d like access, and a mailing list (I think; > if not, we need one). > > That goes for anyone else also. :) > > --Jeremy > > On Jan 4, 2008 5:09 PM, Anthony Kelly <ruby-forum-incoming@andreas-s.net > > wrote: >> >> DHH wrote: >>> That way we don''t bestow "official" status to a group of people with >>> good intentions who then never get around to actually doing the work >>> (and at the same time discourage anyone else gunning for the same >>> slot >>> from getting to work). >>> >>> This is especially prudent if this is to be a comparison to Rails >>> Core. That group has its members picked from people who actually did >>> something. Not from people who said they would do something. I think >>> that''s a good model to follow. >> >> This sounds very fair... Who''s up for it? And what should ''it'' be? >> railsbeginner.com? Neighborhood Watch for the wiki? Something else? >> Either way let''s get organized. Suggestion for a name: ''Ruby on >> Rails: >> Documentation Taskforce''. Well, anyway, let''s agree on one and then >> create at least a google group to get things together. >> >> -- >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. >> >>> >> > > > > -- > http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ > > My books: > Ruby in Practice > http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ > > My free Ruby e-book > http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ > > My blogs: > http://www.mrneighborly.com/ > http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ > > >--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 14:03:43 -0800 (PST), DHH wrote:> That way we don''t bestow "official" status to a group of people with > good intentions who then never get around to actually doing the work > (and at the same time discourage anyone else gunning for the same slot > from getting to work).As a serial well-intentioned suggester, I strongly agree. -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Courtenay wrote:> I still have around $7,000 from the caboose doc project fundraiser to > support a decent effort to improve rails documentation. Now that we > are post 2.0 I think it is time again to find a worthy effort to fund. > Suggestions welcome! >Excellent!> There is currently a google group for ruby on rails documentation. > It''s dormant. Feel free to contribute. >OK. Do you have link. Let''s use that. Also, anyone that can check over the RoR wiki and point out discrepancies/poorly written pages or better yet fix them will do a lot towards this effort. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Jeremy McAnally wrote:> There is already a considerable group of us laboring on documentation. > We have a Basecamp if you''d like access, and a mailing list (I think; > if not, we need one). >Can I get access to the Basecamp and the mailing list? Feel free to email me. Thanks. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I believe someone received/is working on getting a dump of the wiki to set it up somewhere on an anti-spammed, stable wiki package. I''m not sure of the status of that... I would suggest setting that up before doing any work on it; otherwise your edits will get overrun by spammers. --Jeremy On Jan 7, 2008 10:22 AM, Anthony Kelly <ruby-forum-incoming@andreas-s.net> wrote:> > Courtenay wrote: > > I still have around $7,000 from the caboose doc project fundraiser to > > support a decent effort to improve rails documentation. Now that we > > are post 2.0 I think it is time again to find a worthy effort to fund. > > Suggestions welcome! > > > Excellent! > > > There is currently a google group for ruby on rails documentation. > > It''s dormant. Feel free to contribute. > > > OK. Do you have link. Let''s use that. Also, anyone that can check over > the RoR wiki and point out discrepancies/poorly written pages or better > yet fix them will do a lot towards this effort. > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > > >-- http://www.jeremymcanally.com/ My books: Ruby in Practice http://www.manning.com/mcanally/ My free Ruby e-book http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/ My blogs: http://www.mrneighborly.com/ http://www.rubyinpractice.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Jeremy McAnally wrote:> I believe someone received/is working on getting a dump of the wiki to > set it up somewhere on an anti-spammed, stable wiki package. > > I''m not sure of the status of that...Thanks for the heads up. Let me know if you hear anything :) Anthony -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Have you guys checked out http://articles.slicehost.com? It was amazingly helpful in helping me get my server configured for rails. Why does that matter? Because I had no clue of how to do ANYTHING in linux before this. It basically held my hand through the most common tasks... and there was a chat where I could ask questions. I would highly recommend using that format for the tutorials/documentation for rails. Anthony Kelly wrote:> Jeremy McAnally wrote: >> I believe someone received/is working on getting a dump of the wiki to >> set it up somewhere on an anti-spammed, stable wiki package. >> >> I''m not sure of the status of that... > > Thanks for the heads up. Let me know if you hear anything :) > > Anthony-- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:27:46 -0500, Jeremy McAnally wrote:> I believe someone received/is working on getting a dump of the wiki to > set it up somewhere on an anti-spammed, stable wiki package. > > I''m not sure of the status of that...I received it... the status is, uh, I received it... I can actually spend some time on it this week, especially if someone''s there to crack the whip I mean remind me I mean help me test it. -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Jay Levitt wrote:> I can actually spend some time on it this week, especially if someone''s > there to crack the whip I mean remind me I mean help me test it.Ooh, ooh, Pick me. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 21:43:15 +0100, Melvin Ram wrote:> I would highly recommend using that format for the > tutorials/documentation for rails.Meh.. I''m not that impressed. For one thing, "Ubuntu LTS" is a designation, not a version. I have Ubuntu LTS on my server - it''s Dapper. Which LTS are they talking about? For another, why is the main menu off to the right instead of in front of my face? I''m not saying it''s awful, I''m just saying it''s not an archetype. The problem with *any* technical documentation is that every single reader has a different level of expertise. As you said, you "had no clue of how to do anything in Linux before this". If I had to read through that level of detail to set up Rails, I''d scream. OTOH, writing multiple versions means there''s more information you have to keep in sync as Rails changes - and more work, in general. Also, geeks suck at seeing things from the viewpoint of anyone less experienced than they are. A good writer can balance all that out. So can a good editorial system (e.g. better wiki software, which we''re working on, for some value of "we" and "working" and "on"). -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Jay Levitt wrote:> Meh.. I''m not that impressed. For one thing, "Ubuntu LTS" is a > designation, not a version. I have Ubuntu LTS on my server - it''s > Dapper. > Which LTS are they talking about? For another, why is the main menu off > to > the right instead of in front of my face? I''m not saying it''s awful, > I''m > just saying it''s not an archetype. > > The problem with *any* technical documentation is that every single > reader > has a different level of expertise. As you said, you "had no clue of > how > to do anything in Linux before this". If I had to read through that > level > of detail to set up Rails, I''d scream. > > OTOH, writing multiple versions means there''s more information you have > to > keep in sync as Rails changes - and more work, in general. Also, geeks > suck at seeing things from the viewpoint of anyone less experienced than > they are. > > A good writer can balance all that out. So can a good editorial system > (e.g. better wiki software, which we''re working on, for some value of > "we" > and "working" and "on").There are always the ''beginner'' sections of the wiki for the ''hand holding'' articles. I agree the the site design isn''t amazing, but the articles are quite good to help a novice. Besides, everyone is a n00b at first :P And multiple documentation sources to bring up the need to update all of them, but it''s also easier to find a documentation source you like if it''s in lot''s of different places. I''m excited to see better wiki software happening. Especially if there will be a preview option. It would be nice to have automatic redirects and standard ways of marking/categorizing articles. Melvin Ram wrote:>>It was amazingly helpful in helping me get my server configured for >>rails.Do you use Apache and the mongrel cluster etc. on your Linux box? The Deployment HOWTO could definitely use some work once the wiki has been migrated. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Jan 7, 4:05 pm, Jay Levitt <jay+n...@jay.fm> wrote:> On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 21:43:15 +0100, Melvin Ram wrote: > > I would highly recommend using that format for the > > tutorials/documentation for rails. > > Meh.. I''m not that impressed. For one thing, "Ubuntu LTS" is a > designation, not a version. I have Ubuntu LTS on my server - it''s Dapper. > Which LTS are they talking about? For another, why is the main menu off to > the right instead of in front of my face? I''m not saying it''s awful, I''m > just saying it''s not an archetype. > > The problem with *any* technical documentation is that every single reader > has a different level of expertise. As you said, you "had no clue of how > to do anything in Linux before this". If I had to read through that level > of detail to set up Rails, I''d scream. > > OTOH, writing multiple versions means there''s more information you have to > keep in sync as Rails changes - and more work, in general. Also, geeks > suck at seeing things from the viewpoint of anyone less experienced than > they are. > > A good writer can balance all that out. So can a good editorial system > (e.g. better wiki software, which we''re working on, for some value of "we" > and "working" and "on"). > > -- > Jay Levitt | > Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they > Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit.http://www.jay.fm | - KristofferDo you use Apache and the mongrel cluster etc. on your Linux box? We the Deployment HOWTO could definitely use some work once the wiki has been migrated. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>> A good writer can balance all that out. So can a good editorial >> system >> (e.g. better wiki software, which we''re working on, for some value of >> "we" >> and "working" and "on"). > > And multiple documentation sources to bring up the need to update > all of > them, but it''s also easier to find a documentation source you like if > it''s in lot''s of different places. I''m excited to see better wiki > software happening. Especially if there will be a preview option. It > would be nice to have automatic redirects and standard ways of > marking/categorizing articles. >Is there better wiki software happening? Url me please. ;) Steven Soroka --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Jay Levitt
2008-Jan-08 00:56 UTC
Rewikify-rails project (was: Re: Rails core team - only development? (was: Rails core team - only development?)
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:04:38 +0100, Anthony Kelly wrote:> Jay Levitt wrote: >> I can actually spend some time on it this week, especially if someone''s >> there to crack the whip I mean remind me I mean help me test it. > > Ooh, ooh, Pick me.Anyone who''s interested, come join the group at http://groups.google.com/groups/rewikify-rails and be prepared to nag me! -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On 8 Jan. 2008, at 02:56, Jay Levitt wrote:> http://groups.google.com/groups/rewikify-railsCorrect URL is /group/rewikify-rails : http://groups.google.com/group/rewikify-rails MK void@novemberain.com http://novemberain.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Yep, I am using Apache and mongrel clusters. It''s not fully configured for speed but it''s enough to get me rolling on rails. Anthony Kelly wrote:> Do you use Apache and the mongrel cluster etc. on your Linux box? The > Deployment HOWTO could definitely use some work once the wiki has been > migrated.-- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
I joined the group though I can''t send email to it. Can someone forward me the recent emails from the that group? On Jan 7, 8:46 pm, Melvin Ram <ruby-forum-incom...@andreas-s.net> wrote:> Yep, I am using Apache and mongrel clusters. It''s not fully configured > for speed but it''s enough to get me rolling on rails. > > Anthony Kelly wrote: > > Do you use Apache and the mongrel cluster etc. on your Linux box? The > > Deployment HOWTO could definitely use some work once the wiki has been > > migrated. > > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
http://articles.slicehost.com/ubuntu-gutsy I just used the articles on the above page. vaxine19 wrote:> Do you have your install steps? They might be helpful, as this > information isn''t in the wiki yet. > > On Jan 7, 8:46�pm, Melvin Ram <ruby-forum-incom...@andreas-s.net>-- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:48:14 -0800 (PST), vaxine19 wrote:> I joined the group though I can''t send email to it. Can someone > forward me the recent emails from the that group?There aren''t any yet! So I have included them between these braces: {} What happens when you try to send mail to it? Could you e-mail me the bounce message? (jayZjay.fm, where Z is the at sign.) I *think* I set it up so anyone who joins can send to it, and I did see one test message from Anthony Kelly, so that seems to be working. -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 03:07:09 +0200, Michael Klishin wrote:> On 8 Jan. 2008, at 02:56, Jay Levitt wrote: >> http://groups.google.com/groups/rewikify-rails > > Correct URL is /group/rewikify-rails : > > http://groups.google.com/group/rewikify-railsAw, you''re just showing off. -- Jay Levitt | Boston, MA | My character doesn''t like it when they Faster: jay at jay dot fm | cry or shout or hit. http://www.jay.fm | - Kristoffer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---