<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Don&#8217;t Be an Open Source Douchebag</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/</link>
	<description>Coding and the games industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:09:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simfoony &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Blog Day 3</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-302</link>
		<dc:creator>Simfoony &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Blog Day 3</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-302</guid>
		<description>[...] Entertaining Code: Es un blog sobre programación y la industria de los videojuegos, escrito por Mikael Hedberg, el jefe de programación de IA de Battlefield: Bad Company. Es bastante reciente pero tiene muchas entradas interesantes para gente que quiera entrar en la industria y algunos muy recomendables en general, como el ultimo: No seas un capullo del software libre. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Entertaining Code: Es un blog sobre programación y la industria de los videojuegos, escrito por Mikael Hedberg, el jefe de programación de IA de Battlefield: Bad Company. Es bastante reciente pero tiene muchas entradas interesantes para gente que quiera entrar en la industria y algunos muy recomendables en general, como el ultimo: No seas un capullo del software libre. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aditya</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-300</link>
		<dc:creator>Aditya</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:29:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-300</guid>
		<description>Good article. Also in the past I have been reminded that Open source companies &quot;also need to eat&quot;. Which tells me that OSS companies sometimes struggle to find the right balance between their commercial offerings and their community projects, and there is a greater degree of insecurity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article. Also in the past I have been reminded that Open source companies &#8220;also need to eat&#8221;. Which tells me that OSS companies sometimes struggle to find the right balance between their commercial offerings and their community projects, and there is a greater degree of insecurity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: slicedlime</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-299</link>
		<dc:creator>slicedlime</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-299</guid>
		<description>Man pages would be a good start, indeed. But man pages usually don&#039;t really fit that &quot;beginners&quot; label... look at the man page for anything reasonably complex like wget without any prior knowledge, and you&#039;ll be quite overwhelmed. And the man page for gcc still scares me ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Man pages would be a good start, indeed. But man pages usually don&#8217;t really fit that &#8220;beginners&#8221; label&#8230; look at the man page for anything reasonably complex like wget without any prior knowledge, and you&#8217;ll be quite overwhelmed. And the man page for gcc still scares me <img src='http://www.entertainingcode.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karsten Wade</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-298</link>
		<dc:creator>Karsten Wade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 03:43:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-298</guid>
		<description>Yeah, the man page situation alone is a bit atrocious.

I wouldn&#039;t ascribe evil motives before the more obvious answer.  Manual pages are plumbing - dirty, smelly work.  There&#039;s a reason it&#039;s not all done yet, and the answer is *not* because distros haven&#039;t demanded it.

The man page generation is the onus of the upstream.  Yes, anyone downstream, such as a distro, can contribute a man page, and it does happen when it&#039;s important to someone.

I&#039;ve been involved in man page discussions over the years, such as part of Red Hat Engineering Docs and in the Fedora Documentation Project.  It requires a staffing effort.  There are, quite frankly, other more important books to write.  It&#039;s also not nearly as much fun, and people aren&#039;t drawn to do it.

That doesn&#039;t mean the distros *shouldn&#039;t* try to solve this, and it in fact is a fairly good cross-distro collaborative item.  But it&#039;s going to require someone(s) passionate enough to drive the right people across the distros.  It could in fact be customer contributors, or a tech writing class at a University, or a set of document writing sprints, or ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, the man page situation alone is a bit atrocious.</p>
<p>I wouldn&#8217;t ascribe evil motives before the more obvious answer.  Manual pages are plumbing &#8211; dirty, smelly work.  There&#8217;s a reason it&#8217;s not all done yet, and the answer is *not* because distros haven&#8217;t demanded it.</p>
<p>The man page generation is the onus of the upstream.  Yes, anyone downstream, such as a distro, can contribute a man page, and it does happen when it&#8217;s important to someone.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been involved in man page discussions over the years, such as part of Red Hat Engineering Docs and in the Fedora Documentation Project.  It requires a staffing effort.  There are, quite frankly, other more important books to write.  It&#8217;s also not nearly as much fun, and people aren&#8217;t drawn to do it.</p>
<p>That doesn&#8217;t mean the distros *shouldn&#8217;t* try to solve this, and it in fact is a fairly good cross-distro collaborative item.  But it&#8217;s going to require someone(s) passionate enough to drive the right people across the distros.  It could in fact be customer contributors, or a tech writing class at a University, or a set of document writing sprints, or &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Twitted by mjasay</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-297</link>
		<dc:creator>Twitted by mjasay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 03:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-297</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was Twitted by mjasay [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was Twitted by mjasay [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SteveC</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-296</link>
		<dc:creator>SteveC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-296</guid>
		<description>I would be happy enough if the distros would just refuse to put anything in /usr/bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin or /bin that didn&#039;t have a man page.  Seeing as how they make their money off support, that seems unlikely though.  I once wrote a script to find everything in /usr/bin that didn&#039;t have a man page, and the list was atrocious.  Coming from SunOS in the old days, where good advice to learning the system was &quot;look in /usr/bin, and read the man pages for anything in there you don&#039;t know about,&quot;, redhat&#039;s stuff is a sad state of affairs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would be happy enough if the distros would just refuse to put anything in /usr/bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin or /bin that didn&#8217;t have a man page.  Seeing as how they make their money off support, that seems unlikely though.  I once wrote a script to find everything in /usr/bin that didn&#8217;t have a man page, and the list was atrocious.  Coming from SunOS in the old days, where good advice to learning the system was &#8220;look in /usr/bin, and read the man pages for anything in there you don&#8217;t know about,&#8221;, redhat&#8217;s stuff is a sad state of affairs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Holton</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-295</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Holton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:37:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-295</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s a catch 22 since people won&#039;t write documentation and tutorials for something unless they understand it.

On the flip side, I wrote a lot of documentation for a couple of projects and wished I didn&#039;t because it attracted more people to the project but eventually we realized that development had essentially stalled (virtually all patches were being ignored) and it would be better for people to use other solutions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a catch 22 since people won&#8217;t write documentation and tutorials for something unless they understand it.</p>
<p>On the flip side, I wrote a lot of documentation for a couple of projects and wished I didn&#8217;t because it attracted more people to the project but eventually we realized that development had essentially stalled (virtually all patches were being ignored) and it would be better for people to use other solutions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wyatt</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-294</link>
		<dc:creator>Wyatt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-294</guid>
		<description>Good calls all around; if we ever meet in a pub, remind me to buy you a pint for this. :)

CMake is neat, yeah, but damn are their docs bad.  Even two years later, apparently.  I was playing with it, trying to convert a tiny project from Autobreakage to CMake (don&#039;t know why, really; sdl_svg is completely unmaintained, at this point), and it took hours of frustration, searching, and finding non solutions to the same problems.  And I never got it building on multiple machines; the lecture ended.

If anything, I don&#039;t think you emphasise documentation enough, even.  It&#039;s part of why I choose to ignore the jeers and frowns that come my way when I reveal that I&#039;m a Gentoo Linux user:  We still have some of the most comprehensive Linux system configuration documentation out there and CURRENT.

For some reason, people seem to think they can write docs once and that&#039;s all there is to it.  But the reality is code changes; systems change; technology changes. (Then again, are you primarily a Windows user?  If so, how much does the Windows app space deal directly with the gremlins of Windows&#039; ever-expanding ABI-soup?)  If you don&#039;t have a dedicated QA/RelEng team, you had best get used to the idea of always going back over your documentation.  This is one place the automatic doc generators can really help; they make the trivial-but-numerous changes mostly transparent.

Speaking of _good_ docs, I think I need to bring up Imagemagick.  Most everything of theirs is very nicely documented, formatted, and interlinked, and usage examples abound.  Granted, any time you start delving into the arcana of it use, you quickly begin to grasp that the name is no joke, but at least the docs are helpful.  It&#039;s how documentation of an end-user application should be.

Inkscape also tries something novel by encapsulating the tutorials and all their directions into regular SVG.  They&#039;re not half bad, as it goes; being able to follow the directions of the text and move things around right there is pretty neat.

Personally, I wish I had a better grasp of the vocabulary used to efficiently make good  technical writing; I&#039;ve done documentation before, and it really sucks if you don&#039;t know what the requirements actually are.  It also sucks to see some of the things you&#039;re up against. ;)

But the Cygwin thing...very lame, guys; very lame.  Windows people, in general, seem to have funny ideas about release numbers and installing &quot;beta&quot; software, but that doesn&#039;t excuse that sort of treatment.

You know, I&#039;m just sort of glad that people are starting to at least get that a tiny numeric increase is a tiny patch that probably has nothing but important bugfixes.  Might make the creeling question about &quot;new maps?&quot; and other such things less annoyingly prevalent.  (Yeah.  Right.)

Disclaimer: Typos, nonsense, and rambling are the fault of a drunk keyboard.   Also exhaustion. D:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good calls all around; if we ever meet in a pub, remind me to buy you a pint for this. <img src='http://www.entertainingcode.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>CMake is neat, yeah, but damn are their docs bad.  Even two years later, apparently.  I was playing with it, trying to convert a tiny project from Autobreakage to CMake (don&#8217;t know why, really; sdl_svg is completely unmaintained, at this point), and it took hours of frustration, searching, and finding non solutions to the same problems.  And I never got it building on multiple machines; the lecture ended.</p>
<p>If anything, I don&#8217;t think you emphasise documentation enough, even.  It&#8217;s part of why I choose to ignore the jeers and frowns that come my way when I reveal that I&#8217;m a Gentoo Linux user:  We still have some of the most comprehensive Linux system configuration documentation out there and CURRENT.</p>
<p>For some reason, people seem to think they can write docs once and that&#8217;s all there is to it.  But the reality is code changes; systems change; technology changes. (Then again, are you primarily a Windows user?  If so, how much does the Windows app space deal directly with the gremlins of Windows&#8217; ever-expanding ABI-soup?)  If you don&#8217;t have a dedicated QA/RelEng team, you had best get used to the idea of always going back over your documentation.  This is one place the automatic doc generators can really help; they make the trivial-but-numerous changes mostly transparent.</p>
<p>Speaking of _good_ docs, I think I need to bring up Imagemagick.  Most everything of theirs is very nicely documented, formatted, and interlinked, and usage examples abound.  Granted, any time you start delving into the arcana of it use, you quickly begin to grasp that the name is no joke, but at least the docs are helpful.  It&#8217;s how documentation of an end-user application should be.</p>
<p>Inkscape also tries something novel by encapsulating the tutorials and all their directions into regular SVG.  They&#8217;re not half bad, as it goes; being able to follow the directions of the text and move things around right there is pretty neat.</p>
<p>Personally, I wish I had a better grasp of the vocabulary used to efficiently make good  technical writing; I&#8217;ve done documentation before, and it really sucks if you don&#8217;t know what the requirements actually are.  It also sucks to see some of the things you&#8217;re up against. <img src='http://www.entertainingcode.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>But the Cygwin thing&#8230;very lame, guys; very lame.  Windows people, in general, seem to have funny ideas about release numbers and installing &#8220;beta&#8221; software, but that doesn&#8217;t excuse that sort of treatment.</p>
<p>You know, I&#8217;m just sort of glad that people are starting to at least get that a tiny numeric increase is a tiny patch that probably has nothing but important bugfixes.  Might make the creeling question about &#8220;new maps?&#8221; and other such things less annoyingly prevalent.  (Yeah.  Right.)</p>
<p>Disclaimer: Typos, nonsense, and rambling are the fault of a drunk keyboard.   Also exhaustion. D:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.entertainingcode.com/archives/dont-be-an-open-source-douchebag/comment-page-1/#comment-293</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 21:56:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.entertainingcode.com/?p=879#comment-293</guid>
		<description>I actually have a friend that is a technical writer and, when I can rope him into it, I get him to do at least quick user documentation (typically it&#039;s project&#039;s he&#039;s interested in and using as well).  There&#039;s a gap in open source software for the graphic/UI design elements and technical writers.  There&#039;s also an over-abundance of unexperienced Project Managers.  Yet most projects are constantly looking for developers.  I&#039;d take a good Project Manager, a good technical writer or a good graphic/UI designer over the best programmer in existence (well, I&#039;m exaggerating a bit there, but you get the idea).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually have a friend that is a technical writer and, when I can rope him into it, I get him to do at least quick user documentation (typically it&#8217;s project&#8217;s he&#8217;s interested in and using as well).  There&#8217;s a gap in open source software for the graphic/UI design elements and technical writers.  There&#8217;s also an over-abundance of unexperienced Project Managers.  Yet most projects are constantly looking for developers.  I&#8217;d take a good Project Manager, a good technical writer or a good graphic/UI designer over the best programmer in existence (well, I&#8217;m exaggerating a bit there, but you get the idea).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

