Conversation
|
Regarding whether rustdoc should be the responsibility of the docs team or the tools team: it seems to me that the docs team's focus is on the content of documentation itself, and so the team's involvement in rustdoc would be advisory, giving feedback from the perspective of experienced documentation authors. |
|
@AndrewBrinker: My position on it was that the html/css part would be handled by the doc team and the rest by the tool team. That's more or less the current situation anyway. |
nrc
added
the
T-core
| The main alternative is not having a team. This is the status quo, so the situation is well-understood. | ||
|
|
||
| It's possible that docs come under the purvew of "tools", and so maybe the docs team would be an expansion | ||
| of the tools team, rather than its own new team. Or some other subteam. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think so - I don't think the tools team have ever touched on a docs issue (other than the code of rustdoc).
|
@GuillaumeGomez, oh that sounds fine. |
|
lgtm |
|
Thanks for writing this up @steveklabnik, looks great to me! |
|
This looks great to me, and I'm excited to codify what y'all have been doing into a formal team structure!
Maybe one way to formalize this is an expectation that RFCs or major discussions that affect the functionality or output of rustdoc should be tagged |
|
@aturon, that seems like a reasonable expectation to me, although I'm not a team member so it's not really my place to accept extra work on their behalf. |
| * @steveklabnik, team lead | ||
| * @GuillaumeGomez | ||
| * @jonathandturner | ||
| * @peschkaj |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not that I object to the list, but I don’t remember seeing this person contributing to the rust documentation. Are they an intern?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, I forgot to reply to this.
They are not, or at least, not that I'm aware of. They've been doing a lot of joint work with @jonathandturner , as well as doing stuff like organizing the Rust Doc Days, etc
|
I’m generally a proponent of this RFC, if only for ability to ping |
| to these areas of the Rust project: | ||
|
|
||
| * The standard library documentation | ||
| * The book and other long-form docs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm assuming that "book" here is referring to TRPL and not rust-lang/book. Is that a correct assumption or do you see the docs team also contributing to the latter?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
rust-lang/book is the second version of TRPL, so they're really the same thing
|
I've removed the "unresolved questions" as it seems they're resolved, from this discussion 😄 Also addressed some of the nitpics. |
|
Hear ye, hear ye! This RFC is now entering final comment period. |
steveklabnik
added
the
final-comment-period
|
Hooray!!! After long, long, long last, the core team has decided to accept this RFC and create the docs team. Thank you everyone! 🎊 🎊 🎊 🎊 🎊 🎊 🎊 |
|
I will create a PR for the website later this evening, if someone doesn't beat me to it 😄 |
|
🎉 times about a billion. |
|
PR sent! rust-lang/prev.rust-lang.org#474 |
12 participants
This RFC proposes creating a new subteam for docs.
Rendered.
r? @rust-lang/core