[SciPy-Dev] SciPy docs: volunteers needed now!
Sat Jul 3 03:08:53 CDT 2010
My own reasons for hesitating have more to do with knowing that any
documentation I write will likely have poor style. I tend to write in
a very informal, conversational manner.
That said, I'll try to do my part as I use parts of scipy, since
having unprofessional documentation is probably better than having no
2010/7/3 Stéfan van der Walt <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> On 2 July 2010 14:14, Joe Harrington <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> I wonder whether there is any other approach that we can explore to
>>> help generate more volunteer work? Do you think it is mainly the
>>> difference between scipy and numpy that explains the drop-off? Or
>>> something else? To the extent that it is the technical differences
>>> - do you think there would be any point in trying to establish
>>> something like nominated experts or want-to-find-out type experts who
>>> will offer to advise on particular parts of scipy - even if they don't
>>> themselves write the docstrings? Or anything else that might help?
>> We already looked for topical experts. We have a few; David can
>> comment more. In the end what we need are rank-and-file writers,
>> people who will take something on, learn about it, and write about it.
>> Yes, SciPy is more technical, but we've all dealt with harder tasks
>> than documenting SciPy.
> All the posts I have seen talk about achieving higher word counts,
> covering more functions, going bigger and better. While that's
> certainly what we want, such requests may be intimidating to new
> My feeling is that we should identify a small handful of functions to
> focus on. That way, we may only document 10 functions a week, but at
> least those will get done. Emanuelle's suggestion to target specific
> writers also seems sensible.
> SciPy-Dev mailing list
More information about the SciPy-Dev