-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 82
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improve package readme #290
Comments
Signed-off-by: James Thompson <[email protected]>
I disagree with the premise here. I think a website readme and a package readme have different purposes. I can agree with the summary in this issue, but not the details. I view a package readme as something which should:
A lot of the README doc at the moment really isn't aimed at the average NuGet consumer - it's about governance of CloudEvents etc. I think we should have a dedicated NuGet-specific README instead, with:
I think that would be more useful to a NuGet consumer than the current full README. In an ideal world, we'd have a different example and summary for each package. |
@jskeet I agree with your assessment here. If it's any help, here are references to some of the PACKAGE.md files that are used for various packages that we ship out of .NET.
We don't have to follow it directly but I find the pattern of documenting key features, some usage info, and a list of key types to be helpful for users wanting to decide if the package is the right thing for them to use. If the format looks good to you, I'd be happy to take a stab at opening a PR. |
@captainsafia wrote:
That would be wonderful - thanks so much! It would clearly be simpler to have a single package readme shared by all packages, although slightly more useful to have one per package. I'll leave it up to you to consider the path to take :) |
Summary
I wish for the base nuget package to have a more informative readme.
Details
The base nuget package should be using the same readme as the repo to make it as easy as possible for a user to get started with the package.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: