@psabata @langdon @sgallagh This is the change we've talked about. Let me know what you think! :)

All right, I think I'll give you two more days and then I'll just merge it. :-)

how about "intro" which will make it less formal (and "quick start" doesn't make sense)

i think this should go under "advanced" it is still to "top level"

I wonder if a FAQ under "making modules" would make sense .. like tips about making them.. not sure if a faq under "using" also makes sense

this needs the "this needs a rewrite" sticker.. the meeting info is wrong

we should probably add mbs and dnf upstreams here

can this collapse? and start closed?

how about "basic modularity" or "Common" .. i don't like "basic usage" when talking about "building modules" and in comparison to just "advanced"

oh.. i forgot how pagure worked with comments like this.. ick.. well.. i gave some feedback :/

@langdon Thanks for the feedback!

oh.. i forgot how pagure worked with comments like this.. ick.. well.. i gave some feedback :/

Heh, yeah, I won't even try to respond to the individual things. :)

But I agree with most of the cosmetic changes.

Good point with a special FAQ for creating modules — we can definitely make sections in FAQ.

My thinking behind including "Architecture" under the "What is Modularity" section is that people should know what a module, a stream, etc. are before they can do anything with it. So maybe simplifying that, and possibly including a deep dive under "Advanced" would be an option?

We've just discussed this with @langdon and @psabata and decided to merge this and continue in additional PRs.