Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merge RubyGems Guides and Bundler Website Guides #164

Open
SandNerd opened this issue Oct 3, 2016 · 11 comments
Open

Merge RubyGems Guides and Bundler Website Guides #164

SandNerd opened this issue Oct 3, 2016 · 11 comments

Comments

@SandNerd
Copy link

SandNerd commented Oct 3, 2016

I also noticed that I couldn't search on in RubyGems Guides while it possible on Bundler website. Hope that's a feature we gain.

@coilysiren
Copy link

coilysiren commented Oct 3, 2016

Thoughts on this (after talking with @indirect)

  1. it's unclear if the amount of work this would take is worth the gain
  2. it's unclear if users will expect the gem and bundle commands to be on different websites
  3. we would not want to start on this until after Bundler+RubyGems 3.0. Bundler is currently at 1.13.

thanks so much for the thought provoking issue @sahal2080!

@duckinator
Copy link
Member

duckinator commented Oct 25, 2016

Talked to @indirect about this on Slack and decided a good first step would be collecting a list of all of the guides on both http://guides.rubygems.org and http://bundler.io and organizing those, so we know what we want the website to eventually have.

Unless we decide to merge them immediately, the second step would be to cross-reference.

@indirect linked to https://jacobian.org/writing/what-to-write/ and https://jacobian.org/writing/great-documentation/, and mentioned that the "three categories of docs" (see the first of those two links) may be useful for organizing.

@duckinator
Copy link
Member

I'm creating a spreadsheet of all of the guides on both http://guides.rubygems.org and http://bundler.io/docs.html, and labeling each as being one of the three categories mentioned in the post I mentioned in my last comment — tutorials, overviews, reference material.

@indirect
Copy link
Member

🎉

@duckinator
Copy link
Member

duckinator commented Oct 28, 2016

We have 70 guides, references, etc total between RubyGems and Bundler.

  • 15 RubyGems tutorials and overviews
  • 4 RubyGems command/specification/API references
  • 15 Bundler tutorials and overviews
  • 21 Bundler command references
  • 14 Bundler release notes

Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YfGKgIGJU_sJL03PwMClStEgH-LNLxq10w7y6Dbuat4/edit?usp=sharing

The Bundler documentation is really impressive.

@SandNerd
Copy link
Author

In addition to the articles above I'd like to add The 8 Types of Technical Documentation and Why Each Is Important.

It'd be also nice if we have a place where anyone can post links of articles that to be considered for inclusion in the official documentation or maybe just referred to. I suggest a gist or something similar to those Awesome lists so anyone can fork it, add content but keep the maintainer in control.

@indirect
Copy link
Member

keeping a list like that is a great idea! unfortunately the link to 8 types of documentation just produces a bunch of encoding error gibberish for me :(

@SandNerd
Copy link
Author

That was the intended effect as it's the first step into infecting RubyGem's maintainers PCs with my virus and from there all gems in the universe! Darn it I blew it again with my big mouth.

In case you haven't already done so, this is the archive.org version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160412123621/http://www.rhyous.com/2011/07/21/the-different-types-of-technical-documentation-for-software-and-why-each-is-important/

@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Member

I'm really missing the Search and Auto-Anchor features of the Bundler site at guides.rubygems.org.

I think a solution that does not involve a big amount of work would be to move RubyGems guides to be one of the guides in this list here and then redirect there from guides.rubygems.org?

@indirect
Copy link
Member

indirect commented May 9, 2022 via email

@duckinator
Copy link
Member

Sounds good to me as well. 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants