Erlware commons readme

[Martin Logan]

I think it would make erlware commons much more approachable for those
that have not used it if the readme, displayed on github, had a list
of or at least a partial list of the functionality found within.

--
Martin Logan
Erlang & OTP in Action (Manning) http://manning.com/logan
http://twitter.com/martinjlogan
http://erlware.org

[Jordan Wilberding]

I suppose we could at least extract the edoc and put in a readme. I'll add a task item for it.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "erlware-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to erlwa...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to erlware-dev...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/erlware-dev?hl=en.

[Eric Merritt]

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Jordan Wilberding
<jwilb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I suppose we could at least extract the edoc and put in a readme. I'll add a
> task item for it.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Martin Logan <martin...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I think it would make erlware commons much more approachable for those
>> that have not used it if the readme, displayed on github, had a list
>> of or at least a partial list of the functionality found within.

I dont think the readme is the right place for edocs. The readme can
easily ( and probably should) have an overview of the modules and what
they are for. But the edoc should be separate if it exists at all. I
suspect it could be put up on erldocs pretty easily.

[Martin Logan]

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Eric Merritt <ericbm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Jordan Wilberding
> <jwilb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I suppose we could at least extract the edoc and put in a readme. I'll add a
>> task item for it.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Martin Logan <martin...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it would make erlware commons much more approachable for those
>>> that have not used it if the readme, displayed on github, had a list
>>> of or at least a partial list of the functionality found within.
>
> I dont think the readme is the right place for edocs. The readme can
> easily ( and probably should) have an overview of the modules and what
> they are for. But the edoc should be separate if it exists at all. I
> suspect it could be put up on erldocs pretty easily.
>

I agree. It should be an easily scannable list of functionality so
that people can make a choice as to whether this library will help
them or not.

[Jordan Wilberding]

I was just suggesting this be extracted from edoc.. not a carbon copy of the edoc, but all that info is in the edocs I believe.

[Eric Merritt]

no just a quick overview for each module I think.

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Jordan Wilberding