Well, that offer is an improvement over the stonewalling we have all seen so often here before, but it still reads a little bit like offering a comb to a bald man. Why? Because many of us are relying on precisely those docs for the info we would put in the suggested patches. So how are we supposed to come up with the patches, when those who already -have- the info keep it so close to their chests?
On Oct 3, 1:35 am, Dianne Hackborn <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Indicator Veritatis <[email protected]>wrote: > > > True, but that is exactly why the team writing the documentation > > should have kept the following related question in the forefront as > > they wrote it: given that such is the case, how -are- users supposed > > to figure out the differences in different components? Trial and > > error? Belated, confusing responses from Google Groups, forums and > > email lists? Or by suitable cross-references from the Javadoc node on > > AsyncTask? > > > You can guess which one of these options is my preference;) > > If there are things that can be improved in the docs, we are happy to look > at patches you may want to contribute. > > -- > Dianne Hackborn > Android framework engineer > [email protected] > > Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to > provide private support, and so won't reply to such e-mails. All such > questions should be posted on public forums, where I and others can see and > answer them. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
