winedump doc

Dimitrie O. Paun dpaun at
Sat Sep 21 01:14:09 CDT 2002

On September 21, 2002 01:57 am, Eric Pouech wrote:
> I really don't think looking into the source in tools/winedump/README is
> way simpler

Of course not. I would suggest:
  -- a general description in the .sgml docs. I don't think including too
     many details there would help anyone. This is documentation that you
     read to get familiar with the project, to understand what's available,
     what you can do. So yes, I fully agree that we should mention the tool
     in there, maybe give an example or two of usage, output, etc.
  -- keep all the formal details for the man page. IMO we need the man page
     first and foremost. The User Guide is a nice bonus. Plus, not 
     duplicating the info is better for maintenance -- the biggest problem 
     with docs is actually maintaining them. We have a lot of docs in the 
     tree that are 2-4 years out of date! That's bad!!! It's way better to 
     mention the tool in the User Guide, and then the user will look up the 
     up-to-date details in the man page.


More information about the wine-devel mailing list