Documentation for the release

[Gervase Markham]

Shane H. W. Travis wrote:
  >>If I promise to carve out my weekend for this, can others promise to 
read
>>the result and perhaps compare it with the previous version to see if I've
>>accidentally nuked important information?
> 
> So on top of your herculean hackathon, there would need to be a herculean
> reviewathon too... which I don't have time for, and which would delay
> release even further. I just cannot think of a time when I'll be able to sit
> down and r= the whole bugzilla documentation manual at once.

Well, then we are completely doomed :-|

Seriously, you wouldn't have to review it all - people could review 
different bits. We could share it out.

> (If you were talking about just checking it all in when you were done, and
> having it reviewed in retrospect... then I'm even less copacetic with the
> idea. Things benefit from having more than one pair of eyes look at it
> before it becomes a fait accompli.)

It wouldn't be a fait accompli - I'd be happy to change stuff back if 
necessary.

> There's lots of specific patches to attack. 

The problem I find with docs is that if you approach it like code, in a 
"patching", you just work really slowly. The fact that we store the docs 
as XML shouldn't fool us. What other authoring group uses a "patching" 
approach to writing prose? People edit, and re-edit as they pass over 
and re-read the document. That's the only way you get something that's 
coherent, consistent and flowing.

Gerv