You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Does anyone else think we need a more prominent link to the full arch install guide ?
Quick test, start at archlinux.org homepage and try and find it.
just pointed a guy at it, and unless it's me and i've missed an obvious link, it seems to be well tucked away, and maybe difficult for newbs to find.
Unless of course its an initiative test
maybe from that a pointer to the devfs/udev Cactus sticky?
Offline
Yeah, I agree...I've wanted to reference it a couple of times and had to take some time to track it down. It should definitely be more prominent...perhaps linked to on the front page of the wiki?
Offline
I think it should be flat out rewritten and I expect it will be in due course. I have only ever installed Arch once so I won't be much good to anyone
Offline
I think it should be moved from official docs to the wiki so it can be maintained. :-)
Dusty
Offline
Agreed... the link to the official archlinux install guide isn't as prominent as it probably should be. Even though I know where it is, I fumble around looking for it at times.
As for documentation styles, I prefer the handbook style for the initial base installation, but the wiki is really cool for all that fine tuning that comes next.
oz
Offline
Offline
I will be assisting Dennis in maintaining the documentation.
More likely, you'll be taking it on single-handedly... 8-) That's awesome though, we have active documentors again! :-)
In addition, expansion and (some) rewrite of the documentation will also take place.
Some advice, don't worry too much about expansion. If you can put it in the wiki, it tends to maintain itself, otherwise you are overwhelmed with maintenance. Some things currently in the wiki really should become standard arch docs though (dibble's cvs/svn package guidelines, my Java packaging guidelines [are these even in the wiki yet?], for example).
Dusty
Offline
I agree with both of those - my custom kernel thing is considered indispensible by many was well
Offline
I agree with both of those - my custom kernel thing is considered indispensible by many was well
Hmmm... yeah, indespensible, but also oft-maintained. I think its better off in a wiki than an official doc.
Actually, its a PKGBUILD, it could almost go in AUR.... hmmm....
Dusty
Offline
Does anyone else think we need a more prominent link to the full arch install guide ?
Quick test, start at archlinux.org homepage and try and find it.
just pointed a guy at it, and unless it's me and i've missed an obvious link, it seems to be well tucked away, and maybe difficult for newbs to find.
Unless of course its an initiative testmaybe from that a pointer to the devfs/udev Cactus sticky?
I made the test and needed many klicks to find the manual. And fist a wosn´t bei the offical Archlinx Installiation Guide. I looked under "I" and came to an installtions guide that stated that i must have a computer with archlinux installed.
Archlinux isn´t my first installiation. Slackware and Debian in old times were much more complicated. But the manual to install it was directly in front of you. We should deliver it with archlinux as well. Otherwise we couldn´t say to them: "Read the fucking manual!"
Offline
The manual is included with the Arch 0.7 install CD, and I believe the screen you get at boot with the CD tells you how to read it, including using a different virtual console for the docs.
However, I agree there needs to be better organisation of some aspects of documentation. I think the install guide should be part of the Wiki along with all the other essential bits and pieces in there.
Cheers
Francis
Offline
Pages: 1