<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>There's a reason why RH sales recommends a professional services engagement to go with the product. To be fair, they also do the same for Sat 5, but my impression is its more worth it right now for a sat6 implementation.</div><div><br></div><div>In a perfect world, yeah docs would be 100%. But if you've worked on a big software project, what happens is that the docs team is reliant on the engineering team to provide accurate, timely information. Also, it'd be nice if they also reviewed what the docs writers are writing. Sadly, when you're up against a deadline, that nice process is chucked out the window and docs writers requests are ignored and review turns into a quick glance and 'Yeah, that looks right.'</div><div><br></div><div>They're currently working on 6.1 which, from what I understand, is mostly UI and workflow improvements.</div><div><br></div><div>-Scott<br><br></div><div><br>On Jan 21, 2015, at 5:52 PM, James Sumners <<a href="mailto:james.sumners@gmail.com">james.sumners@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br><br>On Wednesday, January 21, 2015, Scott McBrien <<a href="mailto:smcbrien@gmail.com">smcbrien@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>It's a brand new product and .0 release. Expecting it to be unflawed is a fallacy.</div><div><br></div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>Should I expect the installation instructions to work for a "release worthy" product? I sure as hell think so. </div><div> </div>I also expect the documentation to thoroughly cover something that is completely different than the last version. Especially when it is mashing together so many disparate technologies that may or may not work together (and probably haven't been used before by people who use the Satellite product). <div><br></div><div>I ended up wiping it out and installing it fresh for a third time today. Each time was different. So far, this time has worked better than the previous attempts. But there are still BIG gaps between what is in the doc, the knowledge the doc should be imparting, and what shows up on screen. </div><br><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>James Sumners<br><a href="http://james.sumners.info/" target="_blank">http://james.sumners.info/</a> (technical profile)</div><div><a href="http://jrfom.com/" target="_blank">http://jrfom.com/</a> (personal site)</div><div><a href="http://haplo.bandcamp.com/" target="_blank">http://haplo.bandcamp.com/</a> (band page)</div></div></div></div><br>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Ale mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a></span><br><span>See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at</span><br><span><a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>