One new chapter to the tutorial, plus a Mercurial repo. hg clone http://repo.arnebrasseur.net/nitrotutorial/hgweb.cgi /your/local/dir That URL should also show you the latest history of changes. e-mail me if you want commit access. The basic tutorial will broadly follow the outline from the Ramaze tutorial : http://ramaze.rubyforge.org/tutorial/todolist.html Small example apps are also welcome. All content can be freely copied and adapted, e.g. to the Nitro repo, to Oxyliquit, to Nitro RDoc, blogs, wikis, etc. (ab)
on 2007-10-01 14:43
on 2007-10-01 19:38
Many, many thanks Arne. Once again I am running short on time today and tomorrow, but I 'll be back on Wednesday. keep up the great work. -g. On 10/1/07, Arne Brasseur <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > Small example apps are also welcome. > > > _______________________________________________ > Nitro-general mailing list > Nitroemail@example.com > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general > > -- http://gmosx.me.gr http://phidz.com http://blog.gmosx.com http://cull.gr http://www.joy.gr http://nitroproject.org
on 2007-10-05 23:21
Thanks for the updated tutorial - made life much easier :-) Aidan
on 2007-10-06 00:12
Wow, those cheatsheets are amazing. Please put them into the tutorial repository!
on 2007-10-06 01:52
Thanks. I'm a little bashful because they do need more work, and I'm sure the core developers see plenty of shortcomings. For future distribution I think we should integrate some of the content into the upcoming Rdocs documentation project. I'd like to structure the Rdocs such that they can generate HTML pages like these in a format that's really accessible to newbies and to people looking for information in a hurry.
on 2007-10-06 04:59
I personally also think the primary documentation should be the RDocs. Every module/class should have a toplevel RDoc section which explains its purpose and typical usage. Public methods should be fully documented. As far as external documentation goes I am (as I said before) a big big fan of wikis. However this would partly overlap with Oxywtf, so we don't need it right away. Better to not split community stuff over too many different locations. So if you feel like contributing stuff, head over to http://www.Oxywtf.de (insert catchy tune). The main virtue of the tutorial repo I see is that it can contain a lot of code examples along with their tutorials. However it might disappear again in the future as it's contents are merged into the main repo/rdoc/oxywtf. Should it get to contain more example apps then can be reasonbly shipped with the main distribution then it might become a package in its own right (e.g. nitro-examples). This will depend on community input. (ab) Robert Mela schreef: > >> cheatsheets... working through og relations today... >> > keep up the great work. >> >> >> >> Oxyliquit, to Nitro RDoc, blogs, wikis, etc. >> >> Nitro-general mailing list >> _______________________________________________ >> Nitro-general mailing list >> Nitrofirstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:Nitroemail@example.com> >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Nitro-general mailing list > Nitrofirstname.lastname@example.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/nitro-general -- Arne Brasseur http://www.arnebrasseur.net email@example.com
on 2007-10-06 17:22
Sounds like there's a consensus. I'll start reading up on RDocs. It might also make sense to coordinate on separate aspects of Nitro for the first pass. I'm finding that learning Nitro and Og while documenting the experience leaves coverage thin and incomplete. With what little time I have it would take a to really learn and document Nitro. It also makes it easier for each of us to take the role of newbie and step through each others' documentation, encountering the errors or missing pieces just as a new user would. :r
on 2007-10-06 18:45
On Oct 6, 8:21 am, Robert Mela <r...@robmela.com> wrote: > Sounds like there's a consensus. I'll start reading up on RDocs. > > It might also make sense to coordinate on separate aspects of Nitro for > the first pass. I'm finding that learning Nitro and Og while > documenting the experience leaves coverage thin and incomplete. With > what little time I have it would take a to really learn and document Nitro. > > It also makes it easier for each of us to take the role of newbie and > step through each others' documentation, encountering the errors or > missing pieces just as a new user would. Actually I would argue against RDocs as the primary documentation. RDocs have some issues. The most overarching one is the need to write code to fit docs rather than the other way around. RDocs are really "programmer docs" not "user docs". I'm preparing to put together a Wiki for Facets Documentation (thanks to these Nitro tutorials btw, I can finally see how to proceed!). However, rather then use a simple flat-file system, I'm going to use a DB and index the documentation by class/module, method, arity, and more. This DB will be the official user documentation (and the RDocs will just be for the programmer's). It will be interesting to see how that builds up over time, and what can be done with the DB, say to generate a reference manual. Perhaps we can work together to create a system we can all use, Nitro, Facets or any other project too. T. P.S. Isn't require 'nitro_and_og' redundant now? Shouldn't it become: require 'nitro' is the same as: require 'raw' require 'og' ?
on 2007-10-07 10:44
> > interesting obversation. However raw is not standalone. -g.