Skip to content

[WIP] Revise the documentation #92

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[WIP] Revise the documentation #92

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

settermjd
Copy link
Contributor

The intent here is to make it that much easier to read. There were a few typos and grammar mistakes. But the main thing that I focused on was readability. I hope that this helps.

The intent here is to make it that much easier to read. There were a few
typos and grammar mistakes. But the main thing that I focused on was
readability. I hope that this helps.
@shochdoerfer shochdoerfer added this to the 0.9.0 milestone Mar 15, 2017
@shochdoerfer shochdoerfer changed the title Revise the documentation [WIP] Revise the documentation Mar 15, 2017
@shochdoerfer
Copy link
Member

We probably should add the "Why Disco?" part to the README.md file to give a better impression why Disco as a DI container does make sense.

Disco needs at least [PHP](http://php.net) 7.0 since Disco relies on the
[return type declarations](http://php.net/manual/en/functions.returning-values.php#functions.returning-values.type-declaration)
feature introduced with PHP 7.0.
Disco needs at least [PHP](http://php.net) 7.0, as Disco relies on the [return type declarations](http://php.net/manual/en/functions.returning-values.php#functions.returning-values.type-declaration) feature introduced with PHP 7.0.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That would be PHP 7.1 by now.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch. Thanks.

@shochdoerfer shochdoerfer modified the milestones: 0.10.0, 0.9.0 Jun 15, 2017
@shochdoerfer
Copy link
Member

@settermjd is this PR still needed?

@settermjd
Copy link
Contributor Author

At this stage, since it's been so long, I'm going to scrap them and potentially look again at them.

@settermjd settermjd closed this Aug 14, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants