Stripped down docs? I think infos are handy

Question

Yes yes i know arch is a minimalist no-newbie distro, and that's why i
like it! i by no mean think i'm a linux expert, nor a newbie, though,
and how did i learn (and keep learning) what i know? reading docs
of course! i think that info and doc sections are in many cases great
learning tools, and it'd be easier to rm them if someone does't like
'em rather than being forced to find 'em on net when needed. would be the
packages so much larger? i think that the time i save when
downloading a pac w/out info pages i'll spend later searching infos on
gnu web site. and when on modem connection this is quite
frustrating. so in the end i suggest that if packages are to be kept
stripped down, the relative infos and docs could be made available
easily on arch site, so one can download them (maybe a pacman option
could be handy?). i end with a sample from tar manpage: "The  GNU
folks, in general, abhor man pages, and create info documents instead.
The maintainer of tar falls into  this  category.   This  man page  is
neither complete, nor current, and was included in the Debian Linux
packaging of tar entirely to reduce the frequency with which  the lack
of  a man page gets reported as a bug in our defect tracking system.
If you really want to understand tar, then you should run info and
read the tar info pages, or use the info mode in emacs."
BTW: Arch is great!

Answer 1

Dusty wrote:I personally don't think you should blame them. Writing documentation is not fun, and I assume nobody's getting paid to do it.  I'm trying to document some of my problems and solutions as I get Arch set up; that's the best I can personally do for the project.
why can't i ? i put in many many many long hours in when i was maintaining packages and that is just as thankless a job.
not to mention i have put in lots of time at this forum and answered or seen answered repeated question. this is every forum regular's bain and is easily solve with current docs.
if i could spend 8 hours or more a day seven days a week then it is not much to ask a doc developers to at least long in for an hour on the forum and whip together a few faqs.
because they are not getting paid means nothing to me. they voluteered for the job and if they felt that they could not do it then they should resign and giv ethe job to someone like that is eager to contribute.
and by no means come back after an absence of months and intentionally try and aggrivate someone working hard to expand the horizons of arch. nope i am sorry but the doc developers are as useless as tits on a bull.
You let people govern which distro you choose?
yes i see arch straying away from some of the things that were impressed upon me that would not change. my policies did not change and my approach did not change. so when you are not longer comfortable in what you do and use whether it is your doing or others whyu continue?
I haven't heard of crux... I'm going to look it up right now. I can't imagine anything better than Arch, but it's always good to search.
Edit:  Crux looks more "beta" than Arch to me, from their site, but that's just a quick impression.
why because it has a very simple web page? because it does not have dependency solving?
crux is as actively developed as arch and their developers are all active in the community. they have a more vibrant community in many ways. and they are keeping their k.i.s.s. philosophy.