Closed fcuny closed 11 years ago
and just to be sure, I summon @sukria @xsawyerx @yanick @ambs @dagolden :)
FWIW, I don't think Dancer 2 should be promoted much more until the documentation is vastly improved. Right now, it's a bad first experience. It should be mentioned as being "in beta" or some sort of hedge phrase.
I would refer both. Production => Dancer In Development (Alpha or Beta) => Dancer 2
I tend to agree with @ambs but in the vein of @dagolden. That is, even though I would prefer to see Dancer2 mentioned as "Development", "Alpha", "Beta", "Whateva", I still think it's under-documented (to say the least), and that there's still a lot of work to be done.
OK, I agree with you, let's wait a little bit more then.
Thanks.
I'll try to jump on the conversation later on today, once $dayjob is over and a few things have been taken care of. :-)
I agree, let's mention D2 as being beta as soon as the documentation is done.
sent on the way, short email! Le 31 juil. 2013 16:54, "Yanick Champoux" notifications@github.com a écrit :
I'll try to jump on the conversation later on today, once $dayjob is over and a few things have been taken care of. :-)
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/PerlDancer/perldancer-website/issues/29#issuecomment-21868313 .
There's no mention of Dancer2 currently on the website.
Do we want to promote Dancer and Dancer 2 at the same time ? Or do we want to mention both, but only document things related to Dancer 2 ?
I can propose something quickly if we agree on this :)