[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "cvs [commit aborted]: cannot commit files as 'root'"

From: Daniel Beckham
Subject: Re: "cvs [commit aborted]: cannot commit files as 'root'"
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:50:31 -0500

----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg A. Woods" <address@hidden>
To: "CVS-II Discussion Mailing List" <address@hidden>
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: "cvs [commit aborted]: cannot commit files as 'root'"

> I think it's more an issue of how people learn to use reference
> documentation.  The CVS manual should be an excellent reference to all
> the details of CVS configuration and operation.

I will agree that much of the needed technical information is there in the
manual.  My main issue with it is the layout and organization.

> However I don't think the CVS manual itself should go too far to being a
> lazy luser's guide to avoiding learning anything.  Yes a separate
> beginners guide might be useful, as might more wide-ranging "how-to"
> documentation, but maybe that's not the business of the CVS developers
> and maintainers, but rather for third party writers to fulfill.  Anybody
> got a "CVS for Dummies" in the works?  ;-)

You misunderstood what I was saying.  I do not wish for a "CVS for Dummies"
document.  I simply think that the manual is poorly written and needs a
reorganization and rewrite.  This may or may not help the "dummies" out
there trying to use CVS, but it will be better for those who need a
comprehensive cvs reference.

I also disagree with you; I wholeheartedly think that it's entirely the
responsibility of the developers and maintainers to write this
documentation, or at least to be instrumental in writing it.  Who knows cvs
better than those who code it?  Unless of course, you mean a non programming
contributor who participates in the project by writing documenation and not
a cheap publisher like Sams or IDG who simply whore their ill written wares
in America's coffee shop bookstores?  =)  The PHP project is a great example
where people contribute by maintaining the documenation even though they
don't submit patches to the code itself.  Is that what you mean?

> Now as to whether the current CVS manual is a suitable and sufficient
> reference, well that's an entirely separate question!  ;-)  All I'll say
> about that is that it's many many orders of magnitude better than what
> came before it!

That may be... but it doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]