Re: Gtk::perl documentation?

[Tom Jennings <tomj wps com>]

> >  I even have a crazy idea about publishing it both on the web
> > and in book form, but I don't know how appealing such a thing would be
> > to a publisher.

> I would be surprised if it wasn't immensly appealing to a publisher 
> liuke Oreiley or New Riders.  There is just a real lack of dead tree 
> information on Gtk and almost none on Gtk+2 and perl.  I'd shop it 
> around once you have somehting solid.

Yes! Most pessimum, O'Reilly publishes and stores stock pretty narrowly
targeted stuff, and more optimistically, Gtk isn't obscure; there's
really little in print about it. For basic how-to and tips, you can't
beat a printed book. For the latest administrivia OK, online or the
source. 

In fact I think it would snowball; since it's so damned hard to get
started writing Gtk stuff due to lack of information, an O'Reilly book
(for instance) would generate new users of Gtk. (And you have some
credibility, having written the one useful tutorial that it seems every
single user of Gtk has gone through... :-)

I would contact a publisher first; make sure they don't already have
someone working on such a thing, and you will likely get good guidance
up front on what they know is successful in approach. Maybe generate one
chapter of the exiting tutorial on tree, and mail to them. The writing
is good and the examples concise. I think you'll nail it.

Shorter is better; I truly avoid those 600 page monsters with
distracting graphics, fluffy television chatter. Good writing is
succinct (unlike this email). The old K & R book still stands as a model
for all, and the tone and approach of the Camel book ain't bad, though
it suffers some organizational annoyances (IMNSHO). Thinner is better! I
don't look forward to plowing through the Linux Gtk/Gnome "bible" that
should arrive today.