[pmwiki-users] Re: Root README.txt With a docs/ Directory
design at softflow.co.uk
Fri Dec 30 16:30:15 CST 2005
Friday, December 30, 2005, 8:59:02 PM, H. wrote:
> Out of curiosity, what's bothersome about having only a helpful README
> in the root and a few convenient, newbie-oriented docs in a
> non-servable docs/ directory?
Since you ask I'll better answer, but bear in mind that this is my
very personal view:
I am one of probably many rather lazy windows users and expect
generally that software installs itself more or less painlessly and
automatically. I am not in the habit of reading README files if I can
see a setup.exe file, and I will consult help files later when needed,
and only then, preferring to work things out myself on the fly and
intuitively, if possible. I certainly would not look into a doc/
directory for information about setting up software, nor to look for
configuration file examples, which would need to be moved and
In the case of Pmwiki I experienced the software online on pmwiki.org,
read about installation there and downloaded the software from there.
since it is designed to work on the net and to be installed on a
server I expect to be online for the installation process, and am
happy to consult installation help on pmwiki.org.
The only different case to this would be if I wanted a stand-alone
version, in which case I would like some html files as part of the
distribution to get me going, in preference to txt files. Those should
just mirror the content of Installation, InitialSetupTasks and
any info for StandAlone installation.
> Having the docs/ directory opens up the possibility of bundling more
> configuration samples and an INSTALL.txt that someone can use to get
> their wiki running -- *then* the online docs take over.
Yes I can see it may be useful if there are a lot of text docu files.
I just hope it does not need to come to that.
I am fully behind the approach Pm outlined.
More information about the pmwiki-users