Juju Docs now live!

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Nick Veitch <nick.veitch at canonical.com> wrote:
> I am sure there are other bits that are needed, or have been left behind. If
> I have missed something, please let me know. That is how we fix things.

That doesn't sound like a good plan. This wasn't a minor detail
missing, but a relevant volume of information just going away, and the
new content being badly formatted.

Whoever is in charge of the new documentation (not sure if that's you)
should take the time to do a review pass over the new documentation
and see what is being left behind, and what is not properly formatted.

> We most definitely do not want to revert to old docs from which people can't
> even install and configure juju properly!

I'm sure the previous documentation wasn't great, after all we indeed
appreciate your help improving that content. That said, silently
taking critical information away is much worse.


gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net