Guild of Writers

On the hopeful assumption that the reason for the lack of response so far - apart from the short time - is just that many non-developers don't read the PyPRP release development thread anymore:

Documentation writers wanted!

Two (and a half) new features of PyPRP still need to be documented for the upcoming release, and that would take less time if I didn't have to do it myself. If you would like to contribute to the release, here is what you can do: Figure out how a new or changed feature works, by experimenting and asking questions, then write down your findings on the wiki (in tutorial or reference form) so that others don't have to repeat the experimenting and asking in the future. Head over here for more detailed descriptions of what there is to do. If the job descriptions or anything else are unclear, please say so. You don't have to be a developer, I'll do my best to take care of the technical side of things.

Christian - did you see the thread Marcello started a few weeks ago?

He replied to it, so I would guess so...

Christian and I talked about this earlier. Please make a distinction between technical documentation and tutorials. We arranged (but please correct me Christian if I'm wrong) that Christian would try to get basic technical documentation for new plugin features. I would start a 'program' to translate these to tutorials and try to enhance the existing tutorials. Mainly since some features that are available in the current plugin aren't fully covered now.

Well, I'd have to re-read our conversation to be sure of what exactly we arranged - but for the task at hand I'm not making a particular distinction between technical documentation and tutorials. Either of the two is fine, my goal is just to have some documentation of any kind for the new features in the release. Developers probably find it easier to write technical documentation about their additions (at least I do), but since in these particular cases the documentation isn't written by the developer, I'm happy to accept whatever the documentation writer is most comfortable with. You are right in that for the moment I am solely concerned with new features - I can live with underdocumented previous features staying underdocumented for another while, but making new features accessible to the user base is the whole point of making a release.

Robert, I'm not sure what you are alluding to - from my point of view the two efforts (making two new features release-ready, started by me here; and improving existing documentation, started by Marcello in the other thread) are largely independent, apart perhaps from drawing from the same pool of volunteers. I actually considered posting this request in that thread, but then decided that a new thread would probably be less distracting and get more attention.