Re: documentation scope (Re: why o why [off topic])

[Stuart Ellis <s ellis fastmail co uk>]

On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 12:48 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
> > Do we have an existing document that could cover policy for
> > scope/lifecycle of docs (what we accept, how we support it, process of
> > obsoleting old work) ?  These issues don't seem to neatly fit just Quick
> > Start, Documentation or CVS Usage.
> 
> I see this as the Documentation Guide.  It is one of our few monolithic
> documents.  It could contain everything about this project, process,
> lifecycle, workflow, how-to, what-is, etc.
> 
> Making separate or joined documents is just about the same thing.  Since
> it's already there, I'm in favor of adding to the Doc Guide as the
> canonical for All Things FDP.

OK.  The current version of this is primarily technical (DocBook/CVS
use), but of course it's due to be revised anyhow.

The only thing I'd add is that big documents can look imposing just by
their size...  I like the way that the current Docs Project site has a
relatively short, action-orientated page ("to get contributing, do this,
then this and then this"), although I agree that the existing content of
the Quick Start Guide page ought to be part of the Big Book of
Documenting.