Re: improving the CG

[Carl Sorensen]

On 12/27/09 6:09 PM, "John Mandereau" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Le samedi 26 décembre 2009 à 21:25 -0700, Carl Sorensen a écrit :
>> But if you write what you would have liked to have had, then it will be
>> available for the next person like you.  And whether it goes in an appendix
>> or in the body of the CG can be resolved later, IMO.
> 
> Whereas detailed explanations will make beginners start more
> comfortably, they will be also a maintenance burden, so a good balance
> is not obvious to find.  Mark, may I suggest you to try to write
> explanations as if you'd have to maintain them as Git evolves during the
> next 10 years? (although you actually won't have to :-)
> 
> I have an objection about putting Git stuff in an appendix: if some text
> is too long to be in the main document, it would better be used to
> improve some generic (and already good enough, with a reasonable
> expected life time) Git documentation.  I know this is much more work,
> but would have a better payoff and this would more likely free you (and
> us) from any maintenance burden other than maintaining an URL.

That was my first thought, too.  But my second thought was that a small
tutorial for LilyPond will be much better for a new LilyPond contributor
than a generic git tutorial.

And I don't see much of a maintenance headache; basic git isn't likely to
change much, and all we're using is basic git.

I think that the most effective way to provide this help is with a small
customized tutorial (including all of the downstream maintenance).

Thanks,

Carl