From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L0Msm-0000FR-H2 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:04:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9C25EE0351; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75AD3E0351 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [67.40.138.82] (crater.wildlava.net [67.40.138.82]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F9CF642F6 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <491B44C4.9030305@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:04:04 -0700 From: Joe Peterson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081002) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki References: <20081111234532.GG7038@aerie.halcy0n.com> <20081112094442.GL4535@mephisto> <491AC569.50407@gentoo.org> <491AC68C.6040701@ceng.metu.edu.tr> <491B4429.4020202@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <491B4429.4020202@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 3c7a0bd3-b663-47e7-8659-474c40c64581 X-Archives-Hash: 3da2ba328cf5ddfc8349402effa22143 Josh Saddler wrote: > It takes time and effort to produce one of our polished, professional > documents. That's duplicating the time and effort that it takes to write > a decent wiki article -- pointless duplication. > > One of the things I'm hearing from just about every other user and > developer is that users would be providing the peer review necessary to > keep documents at a general level of quality. This means "let the wiki > live its wiki life," which means there's no need to reformat the article > as something else. If it's a decent wiki article, then it should stand > on its own merits....as a wiki article, nothing else. It's a community > contributed article on the community-contributed resource. That's where > it belongs. > > Most folks have said they're okay with official Gentoo documentation and > a second community-contributed resource (that may not be as accurate, > tested, readable, etc.) So keep that system around. If you want to jot > up a quick howto, or an article filled with individual speculation and > anecdotes, keep it on the wiki. If you want a doc to be considered *the* > authority on its subject (such as > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xfce-config.xml ;)), maintained by Gentoo > developers, then submit it to the GDP via bugzilla, or provide updates > to one of the docs we already have. > > There really is no reason why we can't have this split. There's no need > to XMLify every halfway decent wiki article just because it's so much > better than everything else on the wiki. Trying to do so involves an > inordinate number of work hours and staff that we just don't have, not > to mention greatly raising the existing maintainer burden. ++ Good plan. -Joe