#326: Create user-facing documentation for depcheck ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Reporter: tflink | Owner: tflink Type: task | Status: assigned Priority: major | Milestone: 0.5.0 Component: documentation | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------+------------------------------------------------ Comment (by tflink):
Looking good, thanks for taking this one Tim. I made a few
[https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=AutoQA_tests%2FDepcheck&acti... wiki/wording changes], please feel free to accept or reject.
Looks good to me, I didn't realize that some of those macros existed.
In the section ''Fixing Failures'', it mentions adding or removing
dependencies. Would it make sense to include an example of each of those scenarios in the ''Understanding failures''?
I think that the errors are going to look the same either way since the only thing we really detect is missing dependencies. Or are you suggesting that the fixes go into more detail and show fixing a failed depcheck run in both ways?
Also, the suggested resolution ''Remove missing dependencies'' seems
odd, but I might not be in the right mindset. How do you remove something that is missing? Should it read, ''Remove incorrect dependencies'' instead?
Yeah, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to be removing something which is already missing. I changed the wording on that.