From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 947de3ff for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 18:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id CF4309BFA1; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:10:11 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CA59478F; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:09:54 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id A2F459478F; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:09:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: from vm6.ganeti.dyne.org (vm6.ganeti.dyne.org [195.169.149.119]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D921E9478D for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 04:09:50 +1000 (AEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: katolaz@freaknet.org) with ESMTPSA id 44425F60478 Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 20:09:43 +0200 From: KatolaZ To: Jon Steinhart Message-ID: <20190916180942.qlipaxn4hq7of3kd@unixfarts.net> References: <20190916145122.GH2046@mcvoy.com> <20190916161040.GM2046@mcvoy.com> <201909161616.x8GGG4Fb020760@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <20190916162614.GO2046@mcvoy.com> <20190916164502.GQ2046@mcvoy.com> <20190916171905.piituc2qdh46kejt@unixfarts.net> <201909161737.x8GHb3SG008244@darkstar.fourwinds.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2igpbnrjnudij7bn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201909161737.x8GHb3SG008244@darkstar.fourwinds.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: [TUHS] [OT] Re: earliest Unix roff X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --2igpbnrjnudij7bn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:37:03AM -0700, Jon Steinhart wrote: [cut] >=20 > It seems to me that you're missing the point here. It's not a question of > whether or not GNU programs have good documentation. It's the fact that > GNU made it hard to find documentation because they took one pile and spl= it > it into two with no guide to what was in each pile. It's not that their > documentation was good or bad, it's that they made it hard to find any > documentation. >=20 > Maybe it's because I'm a child of the 60s, but I'm with Arlo Guthrie on t= his > one (from Alice's Restaurant): "And we decided that one big pile is better > than two little piles, and rather than bring that one up we decided to th= row > ours down." > Dear Jon, I am a child of the 70s, so I know the drill ;) What I am saying is that the vast majority of the software from the GNU project actually has a good-quality manpage acoompanying it. And it also has the same documentation in info format. Hence I see no point in vomiting on info (which I mostly dislike anyway, as I said), as on any other document format, as long as the same information is made available via manpages as well, as it is the case for most of the software present in current Unix systems, wherever it comes from. The split caused by the introduction of info has mainly been cured by the community, maybe too late, but still. We can discuss whether the split was necessary or "right" in the first instance, as we could discuss whether it was good or not for cat(1) to leave Murray Hill in 1979 with no options and come back from Berkley with a source code doubled in size and 9 options in 1982. We could do that, but perhaps we shouldn't get too partisan, since the history of Unix is not a simple single-threaded and linear one, as the many insightful contributions posted in this ML show. It's a continuum, where it is difficult to find any single element which is totally right or totally wrong. I honestly see more danger in the recent trend that avoids documentation altogether, except for a scant README.md file at the top of the sources. There is an entire generation of developers who see little value in producing (and using) online documentation, where by online I mean manpage-like or info-like docs. For the simple reason that the main way in which documentation is produced and distributed has changed a lot in the last 25 years. Now it's all about googling the right words, unfortunately. We can keep blaming RMS, info, or the GNU project, but indeed blaming them for the Web would be a bit too much ;) And this is perhaps becoming OT anyway. HND Enzo Nicosia --2igpbnrjnudij7bn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQSOWdaqRF79tKFTPVpfILOuC18GLwUCXX/P5AAKCRBfILOuC18G L6RqAKCNfTmtuKckeqppDDFhk1oi89/WygCeKyVa/+4Cy3ZFzMunrOmwABp967s= =K7ww -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2igpbnrjnudij7bn--