[wp-docs] Filling Holes in the Codex

[Podz]

Michael B wrote:
> What?!  Why reinvent the wheel?  I thought a very logical, concept had 
> been introduced to providing downloadable, printable docs.  Why one 
> file?  How big would that be?  How much more difficult will that be to 
> keep updated?  I'm very confused...

Matt was talking about a release cycle.
For instance, every 3 months (though no time was specified) there is a 
formal release of docs. The exact format was not discussed. This serves 
two purposes at a minimum:
- as a manual for those that like that sort of thing
- as an archive

Of course, if it serves as an archive that would seem to hint at Codex 
supporting only the current release.

I can see Matt's point. It would be good to have archived docs (point to 
consider: this may be GPL but a shedload of credits would be nice. WP 
code is GPL and there is a list of Copyright Holders in Codex. It's not 
beyond the realms of possibility for those contributors to also be 
mentioned an dhey - wouldn't you like your name in print too ?) but I 
still cannot see the point of a single download. I still think it is 
wasteful and certainly would stress most machines to open while also 
having a browser running (we cannot assume that users will have solid 
hardware).
But then maybe the full downloaded zip is actually a multitude of the 
small files ?

If the date is set and aimed for publicly (and I mean very widely 
announced) for when last submissions are in then do whatever it is to 
create the docs. If that is a good, proven script then lock codex, let 
it run and unlock. If it us, then we divide the task and go for it.

So the docs can continue to be updated - we just set targets for 
publishing, but we MUST adopt an approach by which even incomplete 
sections are published.

I think it can work - but I very strongly feel that contributors names 
should be part of the package. And I know this will get struck out too.

P.