Re: [MC]: better FAQ.

Hi, Peter!

I assume that is more convenient for you to use, than

Yes.  Not only that, but it avoids confusion.

I might be just me, but MC being just a folder in some unrelated site
feels cheap - and worse: not easy to remember.

You can use  It's long, but it's easy to

Don't you think it will be usefull for newcomers here, 
if email footer has a link to MC homepage and FAQ? And archives?
People who want to find the homepage and the FAQ can find them.

You are right. I was just thinking how to made finding URL to real MC
homepage easy and obvious.

We need a _real_ homepage first.

Actually, the homepage is mentioned in the hints.  I think that the
hints should be gradually removed and replaces with a clear interface
and clear, well organized documentation.

I never heard about _this_ clear interface and docs. ;-) And for really
powerfull tool, as MC is and plans to remain, is not possible (or maybe
even desirable).

I don't understand.  I have never read hints for The GIMP.  I have never
read its manual.  I have never played with settings that are not available
through the GUI.  Yet I can use it.  The same applies to Mozilla.  There
is nothing wrong with making the interface obvious to use.  Don't tell me
that it's impossible.

It's easier to add a option without adding user interface to it.  But it's 
not acceptable in serious projects.  At least it can be used temporarily 
for testing before the GUI is added.

What we had in mc until yesterday was an option that has been broken for
years, wasn't present in any user interface, affected only root and should
have not existed in the first place.  Yet it was documented in several

Are you saying that it's impossible to do it better?  It is possible.  
Sorry if I misunderstood you. could stay for ever, IMHO.

Until IBM abandons DB/2, just like it did with OS/2.

Tip: DomАcМ strАnka programu Midnight Commander je

Thanks, applied!

I'll can ask my fiendly neighbor web designer to look 
at MC homepage, redesign it, and if you like it, take it.

Are you interested?

Yes, I am.

I have good experience with creating simple "cheat sheet"
with performance tips/quirks for beginners. Shorter that full FAQ.
We'll see.

OK.  I'd like to have it on the web only.

I don't think this question is asked very often.  

Maybe because if this happens, beginner user will just abandon MC,
without even bothering to ask what happened. 8-(

That's possible.  Still, I'm assuming that the questions asked in the
mailing list are representative of the questions that the users may have.

Do you mean in mc-4.6.0-pre1.tar.gz? IMHO, TODO is not sorted there. ie,
TODO file, in "* Documentation" section says about mc.sgml, mentions

The CVS version is better:

LXR is behind CVS a little bit - the latest changes haven't propagated 

mc.sgml is not a bad idea if used consistently (i.e. the manuals are
removed from CVS) and doesn't require patches to obsolete SGML tools, as
the old version did.  Maybe XML is better.  nroff format is obsolete and
inconvenient.  It doesn't even support third-level headings (after .SH and
.SS), and they are needed.  It requires non-obvious tricks to highlight
words before dots and commas.

As for 3.0, it should be replaces with something more realistic.  
Although I must say that setting target versions for bugs delays new
releases and takes a lot of fun from hacking.

I don't know what you mean.  If you mean my conservatism about new
dialogs, there are reasons for that.  Users have hard time finding "Learn
keys" even now.

Because FAQ does not mention that - in the first line! ;-)

2.2 Why don't function keys (or some other key) work?

Not that I really like how it's described.  Maybe we need a "wizard" that 
would ask user: "It looks like you haven't used this terminal before.  Do 
you want to set up the keys?"  It's ugly, I know.

Pavel Roskin

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]