[SciPy-dev] 2-review system on doc wiki

[Bruce Southey]

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Joe Harrington <jh@physics.ucf.edu> wrote:
> Chuck Harris recently posted on the numpy-discussion list a request
> for numpy 2.0 requirements.  I suggested that we include reviewed docs
> in 2.0.

I think you need to a provide a plan on how this can be done although
clearly it will not be the 2.0 release but perhaps the somewhere in
the 2.x series.

>
> The problem is that the docstring review is stuck.  We need to
> implement both a technical and a presentation review, but we currently
> lack labor to do the job.  Pauli Virtanen has been busy with other
> commitments, so there has been little progress on doc wiki changes.

What do you actually need by technical review and presentation review?
I think that we need some sort of checklist that people can go through
for each part. Really just numpy alone it a big task so it would be
nice to get people to proof other people's work.

> So, this is also a call for a Django programmer who can add a second
> review capability to the doc wiki.
>
> If nobody steps forward, then we'll have to abandon the idea.  I think
> this would be a shame, because there are many docstrings that are
> technically complete but impenetrable, and others that are well
> presented but technically incomplete.  It won't be hard to fix these,
> but we need a system to find them.

Can you provide examples that illustrate these two problems?

I am prepared to try to do something if I can understand what to do
and I can get the time.  But the Django side is beyond me as I am
trying to learn it for my own project.


>
> Any takers?  Ideally, it should be someone who has written docs in our
> system and who has Django experience, but likely Django or similar
> experience is more important for this.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --jh--

Bruce