kallithea documentation and references to version numbers

[Thomas De Schampheleire]

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Mads Kiilerich <mads at kiilerich.com> wrote:
> On 01/13/2015 09:04 PM, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The current documentation, available at
>> http://kallithea.readthedocs.org/en/latest/, sometimes contains
>> references like [1]:
>>
>> - Starting from Kallithea version 1.2 ...
>> - From version 1.4 Kallithea ...
>>
>> but these version numbers are not valid Kallithea references, but they
>> are inherited from our ancestors.
>>
>> How should we handle such cases?
>
>
> Yes, that is wrong.
>
> I think we should enjoy that Kallithea is starting "now" and doesn't have
> any history. We should remove such references to the past from the
> documentation. We should however also make it more clear how to upgrade from
> RhodeCode.
>
> The documentation could also benefit from more basic proof reading from
> someone proficient in English/American.
>
> Other improvements of the content or structure of the documentation would
> also be appreciated. But please keep iterations short so we avoid conflicts.

Other problems are duplication/conflicts between the wiki and the
documentation, for example there is a contributing section on both of
them, but the contents are different:

https://bitbucket.org/conservancy/kallithea/wiki/Home
http://kallithea.readthedocs.org/en/latest/contributing.html

We should decide one location for such information, and keep only that.
Do you have a preference?

The advantage of the in-tree documentation which is on readthedocs
too, is that it is also available off-line for users that have the
repo.
But is readthedocs updated with the tip, or with the latest revision?