[Catalyst-dev] Re: RFC, docs reorg, again

[Kieren Diment]

On 5 May 2008, at 21:01, Matt S Trout wrote:

> And here's the reason: If something fucks itself on a production  
> server
> and you're the poor bastard fixing it at 3am, you might want the docs
> there to help. And you might want to be able to whack the docs onto  
> the
> system you're currently on -without- pulling any extra code onto  
> it. Which
> means it can't be in Runtime -or- Devel.
>
> Not that that's necessarily a -good- reason, this shit is all Hobson's
> choice.
>

OK, I think we're getting somewhere here.

But again, if it's 3am and the server has overflowed it's nappy you  
don't need the tutorial, so, what I think we need is:

1.  Tutorial in a separate dist (with some deprecation warnings in  
the docs to indicate which bits are out of date and in need of an  
update, since we're going to split it into a new dist with new  
versioning schemes - I volunteer the wooden tuit that castaway gave  
me yesterday for this).

2.  Manual as a dist by itself, which is a required prerequisite of  
Devel, optional prereq of runtime.

addendum:

Overhaul of ::Manual and Tutorial requires a few stainless steel  
tuits each, and probably ought to be concurrent with the moose branch  
(asuming a release cycle shorter than perl 6's).  I'm working on  
obtaining these, but it may take some time.