Put the site back the way it was. You have broken days and days of my work without even the courtesy of asking. Once the site is back to the original, then we can talk about new ideas.
So this is how you repay me? I spent many, many hours getting Gem working on the auto-builders and you fuck up my work? That is really, really low. I was holding on to the pure-data.info because I feared something like this. I thought you had learned so I signed over the domain name to you. And you do this to me. And you don't even have the courage to admit you were wrong and set things right. You're still fighting. This is a ridiculous and massive waste of time and energy.
.hc
On Sep 27, 2006, at 4:20 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
hi.
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Sep 26, 2006, at 6:26 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
after all, the /dev section IS "documentation about development", and not "development" itself.
By that standard then everything on the web is documentation. We are using a narrower definition which makes a lot more sense. Manuals, HOWTOs, tutorials, these are documentation. Everything in /docs/developer was a HOWTO, manual, or tutorial
like http://puredata.info/docs/developer/sourcenotes ?
The developer section is meant for developer tools: key links, bugtrackers, wikis for project management, etc. The content in the wikis will probably ultimately end up being boiled down to docs, but they are not there yet. The bugtracker is documentation on bugs, but it is not a manual, howto, or tutorial. Please read the archives for a more in depth discussion.
i did so. the discussion has taken place in 2003 when the site was set up. i do believe that several things in this design did not work out.
so in theory(!) i see no reason to have 2 separate branches with the same topic but different content.
i still don't. even if there is some artificial segregation line between the 2 branches, which i could memorize. if i want to know what is going on in "development" (e.g. what's on in pddp, or how the exact cvs download command was) i will just click on the "development" tab (and not just me as a "noob" who just wants to browse the information, but me as somebody who has worked for years with the website's current structure).
however, you are completely right: in practice there are external links pointing to the old & deprecated location, which must be handled. the good thing is, that this could be handled very easily: i can set up a rewrite rule on the webserver, so that http:// puredata.org/doc/dev is automatically redirected to http:// puredata.org/dev which should make all the links valid again.
We discussed this stuff at length when we set up the website (check the archives). Its been working well as far as I've seen. I see no reason to change it now.
the discussion has taken place in 2003 when the site was set up. i don't think that it has been working so well.
why i didn't ask? because we are really bad at decision-making. most discussions stop at the point where "everybody" (this is: you, me, probably a single 3rd person) has clarified their poisition.
It takes 10 seconds to send such an email. It would have saved us all a lot of time and hassle.
how much time have you lost through this hazzle? (esp. when writing an email takes you just 10 secs)
if the docs/development/ section is really just meant as a selection of how-to's, tutorials and manuals, then why don't we just use some autocollector, that grabs all tutorials,... from / dev/ (and wherever).
just to reiterate why i do this: (overlapping) information is kept in 2 separate places. information therefore gets duplicated (cloned). maintainment of the cloned information usually only effects one branch, resulting in either divergent information, outdated information (in one branch). information that does not get duplicated is missing in one branch.
mfg.asdr. IOhannes
PS: your old links should now at least work.