Documentation of services
Peter Smith
pasmith at wbmpl.com.au
Thu Aug 12 03:11:50 UTC 2004
James Wilkinson wrote:
>Kevin Wang wrote:
>
>
>>You really want to leave service names the same. don't change them
>>gratuitously. It confuses users.
>>
>>
<snip, snippety snip>
>So what's the best way to document these services? We've had suggestions
>of man pages: what else, besides third party web sites, is reasonable?
>
>
>
>>It's not nearly as simple as you might think. For example, nfs
>>depends on 'portmap'. imho dependencies like this need to be
>>expressed somehow, but the existing infrastructure doesn't do that.
>>
>>
>
>I'm glad we agree!
>
>James.
>
>
>
As an ancient newbie, I'd like to add my pennyworth -
There must be a man page associated with each package name.
There should to be a man page associated with each command name.
Each man page associated with a package should identify all the commands
in the package ("See Also"), and (my pet gripe for this week) it should
identify all the files affected by the command ("Files").
I get annoyed at the way that the "hard bits" are being hidden from the
tender eyes of the non-coder, a la Windows, especially with respect to
the GUI interfaces. And what's with this new-fangled "info" stuff, anyway?
</rant> I feel better now..
Regards,
Peter Smith
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list