Slash Boxes

Slash Open Source Project

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login
Loading... please wait.
  • I hate to be a pessimist, but does this mean that work will stop and a usable customization document? Will all the free help turn into plugs for the book? I hope not.

    EDUSlash - We put the EDU in .EDU []
    • The question sort of stands the issue on its head, in my opinion. I think "Running Weblogs with Slash" is really designed to complement the free documentation for Slash. The issue is that the free documentation is not as strong as it ought to be, considering the wide deployment of the code as a publishing platform.

      I'd like to take this opportunity to apologize for not contributing more to the free documentation for Slash 2.x. In the short discussion of the book [] that I posted on, I mentioned that I am still running Slash 0.x to run two fairly large sites. This has become a huge maintenance problem and has really limited my personal development productivity.

      We despirately want to move to the main branch. When we do, it will be far easier for me and the people who work with me to contribute to the project in a more substantial way. When I think about adding value to this project, the biggest bang for the buck would come from enhancing the free documentation.



      Dave Aiello
      Chatham Township Data Corporation []

      • by pudge (6) on Friday February 08 2002, @11:28AM (#4186) Homepage
        There is still *plenty* of room for free documentation. The methods in Slash::DB -- part of the public API -- are essentially undocumented, and there are a great many of them. The text about site design in the Slash book is very basic, and there's a lot more to be said about communities and management/administration of those communities. Those are just a few examples, there are far more.