← Back to team overview

bzr-windows team mailing list archive

Call for testing: chm documentation for Bazaar 2.0

 

Step 1 towards a better windows installer is now done ...

I now have Bazaar's 2.0rc2's documentation successfully (and nicely)
converted to chm format. I'd like some *quick* feedback on the result
please before I submit the associated patch for review.

WARNING: If there's any risk of spreading a virus via a chm file and
your virus data files are not up to date, please don't download the file
below until others have confirmed that it passes their virus checker
without problems!

I hope someone is still reading ....

If so, go to http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/bzr.2.0rc2-downloads/, grab the
chm file and let me know what you think. The things I want feedback on
in particular are:

1. Ease of navigation
2. Scope and impact on searching
3. Granularity and impact on printing.

W.r.t scope, I'm thinking that the Developer Docs and Foreign language
docs ought to be excluded. Otherwise searches are going to throw up a
lot of matches that won't help end users at all and may well confuse
them. For the developer docs, I'm thinking they ought to be available in
a separate chm file which is also bundled in our Windows installer. For
the foreign languages, I'm thinking they *ought* to be in their own chm
files as well (but something less ambitious that that may be the reality
for 2.0).

W.r.t. granularity, I've put some effort into making topics of a
sensible size for the purposes of printing. In particular, the 250+ page
Release Notes are broken up by release now. The User Guide is also
broken up.

Note: I'm yet to break up the User Reference so it's still 90+ pages
long if someone wants to print that as a "topic". The fallback here is
for developers to grab the User Reference in PDF (now also available!)
and selectively print pages from there. Is that acceptable?

In summary, I feel this is a big step forward compared to the chm file
the current trunk produces. I hope it's now professional enough to
include in the 2.0 installer. Yes/no?

Ian C.



Follow ups