From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Merging =?utf-8?B?4oCYSEFDS0lOR+KAmQ==?= in the manual? Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 21:20:33 +0200 Message-ID: <87k2vo4kqm.fsf_-_@gnu.org> References: <87k2w1tq0y.fsf@163.com> <87h9r438er.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <87egm8h8w7.fsf@gnu.org> <87egm83019.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <87zj4ve6nm.fsf@gnu.org> <878ucf2ma7.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <87oal5dcmq.fsf@gnu.org> <87y4k921s2.fsf@openmailbox.org> <87a8wnayml.fsf@gnu.org> <878uc6p3wu.fsf@openmailbox.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41858) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yz8mn-0006Oc-24 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 May 2015 15:20:42 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yz8mj-00058E-Jt for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 May 2015 15:20:40 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:53285) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yz8mj-00058A-Fc for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 May 2015 15:20:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <878uc6p3wu.fsf@openmailbox.org> (Mathieu Lirzin's message of "Sat, 30 May 2015 15:53:53 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Mathieu Lirzin Cc: guix , Feng Shu Mathieu Lirzin skribis: > When reacting, I didn't realize that most of your statement is actually > documented in the recent "Running Guix Before It Is Installed" node in > doc/guix.texi. > > Nevertheless, I find it not really relevant to give hacking information > in chapter 'Installation'. Agreed but... > The attached patch tries to give a better consistency in the location > of these useful informations. ... c71979f just did the opposite move, so no. :-) > Even if I find this patch appropriate ;-), my personnal preference would > be to delete HACKING, and move all its informations in the chapter > 'Contributing' of the Holy Bible (with appropriate refinement of > course!) and refer to it in README. Opinions about this? Yeah, probably. I=E2=80=99m not completely sure about moving things like p= atch submission and coding style in there; on one hand, it=E2=80=99s not somethi= ng one would expect in a =E2=80=9Cuser manual=E2=80=9D, but on the other hand,= it=E2=80=99s nice to have everything consistently maintained in one place. Another option would be to have a second .texi document for these things (like Findutils, which has a =E2=80=98findutils-maint=E2=80=99 document.) What do people think? Ludo=E2=80=99.