Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite

Subject: Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-17 20:51:54

On Jan 17, 2014, at 10:42 AM, Alexander Lamaison <awl03_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Gennadiy Rozental <rogeeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
>> Paul A. Bristow <pbristow <at> hetp.u-net.com> writes:
> 
>>> and it's what I use for everyday work, and I'm sure I am not the only one doing this.  So I'd like  to see Richard's documentation of the current release Boost.Test adopted now.
>> 
>> And I'd like to see a documentation which covers full library, not part of it. And the one which covers latest state of the library, not the version from 5 years ago.
> 
> It's not the version from 5 years ago; it's the version in the latest
> release today!  I don't know why you keep insisting otherwise.
> 
> Sure, the trunk may have had new changes for X years, but the trunk is never released.  Until your version is merged to release it remains the version of tomorrow, not today.

He said he can't do that until the docs are ready.

>> What about next release? Do you think it is a good practice if we release these docs now and then something completely different half a year later?
> 
> Absolutely.  The docs should be the best available documentation for the code that ends up in the release.  When the new version ends up there,
> then we update the docs to match.

The docs for the new version must be ready when the code is merged to release, not started after.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)