[arch-dev-public] [arch-general] Official Installation guide needs your help!

Dan McGee dpmcgee at gmail.com
Sat Feb 7 10:10:55 EST 2009

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Tom K <tom at archlinux.org> wrote:
> The name doesn't really matter. IMO anything we include on the official
> ISO becomes official documentation by default. In that context, I
> believe we should retain a simple how-to-install-Arch-core doc, with
> clear direction for users regarding where to go next i.e. the wiki. In
> other words, +1 for Xavier's suggestion in the bug report - a bare-bones
> install guide consisting of revised sections 1-3 and a very brief Pacman
> overview.
> I have a problem with the Beginner's Guide as official documentation, as
> I don't believe it gives an accurate first impression of Arch. It is not
> compatible with Arch core principles, IMO, although I accept that it has
> established itself as a useful community-provided resource. I have
> already mentioned these reservations to Misfit, btw.

I also have a bit of an issue with the beginner's guide, as a few
other people seem to have expressed here (Tom and Loui). It is far too
long to be a useful text document at this point and it isn't really an
install document at all but a "setting up everything under the sun"

I understand the benefits behind getting some documentation on the CD,
but I don't think the beginner's guide belongs. There should really be
"official" documentation there that describes the install process and
nothing more. Hopefully someone can step up to the plate and maintain

> I'll have a look over dolby's latest revision, and if I have additional
> suggestions, post them in the bug report.

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list