Martin Spott wrote: > simon wrote: > >> There's definitely issues with crossover between existing documentation >> (FAQ, User Manual, docs-mini) and what's on or will be on the wiki. I >> don't think everything belongs on the wiki due to current conversion >> limitations (ie. wiki -> pdf) and perhaps even control issues, but I do >> hope that most documentation finds its way to the wiki [...] > > This is _your_ opinion, other opinions may differ, mine for example. > > Indeed, documentation is a weak point in the history of FlightGear > development. Guess why ? Because writing documentation that you can > rely on and which comes in a presentable outfit is unpleasant work, you > don't get fancy features out of it and feedback from the readers is > very little as is support from developers in case you found something > that seriously looks like a bug (while testing a features that some > developer claims to be functional). > If your documentation is wrong, then users will shoot you, if your > documentation is correct then people take it as a matter of course. The > whole thing doesn't change with the medium you use to publish the > documentation - I'm playing the game for several years now, simply > trust me. > > People had the chance to improve existing documentation for years now, > everyone knew there's a manual that needs continuous maintenance but, > except from very few noticeable exceptions, nobody cared. > Did _you_ take at least _one_ single attempt to contribute _anything_ > to the existing manual ? No, you didn't. Period. > > Now you set up this wonderful Wiki, (really well done, hat off), grab > some information from here and there and try to make everyone believe > that you created the Holy Grail of FlightGear documentation. > > In case your primary concern _really_ is serious and extensive > documentation for FlightGear, why then didn't you add _anything_ to our > manual ? Do I smell some "Not Invented Here" attitude ?!? > > The Wiki is great for collecting spreaded documentation in a central > repository, although after a while you'll notice that a collection of > half-baken HOWTO's, things picked from various places put together in a > nice link-list doesn't make a replacement for a handbook - that you try > to fight so much. > I realize very well that you're attempting to censor my advertising for > "The Manual" by the threat of deletion (which you already did twice). > Don't you think censorship should be history nowadays ? In your threat > you write "we don't want stagnation", so why don't you do anything > against it by actually contributing _content_ ? Maybe because this is > much more unpleasant than creating something fancy new even if the > content is old ? Maybe you should read The Manual at least once, it > contains more valid information than you'd expect. > > If it makes you happy, you may delete the phrases that I submitted to > the Wiki, this is an open platform, and, as Erik noted expressis > verbis, "there is no owner". Be assured that I'll re-submit those parts > the next time I visit the Wiki because I _know_ they are valid. _But_, > if you really have in mind censoring other people's additions, then > please be honest and call this Wiki your private playground and don't > propagate it as the official FlightGear Wiki. > I still support your idea of having this Wiki as place of refuge for > spreaded comments, README's, HOWTO's and such. Please stick to the > goals you verbalised yourself. > > Martin. >
Martin, Let me just say that I think the Flightgear Manual is an excellent work (yes, I've read it), and I hope to be able to contribute to it. I'm not trying to steal the show or create a "holy grail" of documentation. I have no such delusions of grandeur. I am, however, trying to help create a resource where users and developers can pool information. I felt your paragraph on the main page of the wiki, concerning the FlightGear Manual and the "bleeding edge" user documentation, was out of place and disrupted the flow of the front page as I noted in my comment to you, "Please move your comments to another page, off of the main page." I have no desire nor ability to censor you. After all, it is a wiki and the history and ability to edit is available to all. I'll leave it up to others to do as they see fit in this case. > (The only single situation when you got into contact with me was one > and a half years ago. These days you called me an "a$$hole" because I > told you I was running FlightGear with a Radeon9200 using DRI drivers > and you didn't manage to ge a similar setup running - on the other hand > you were not willing to share details about your setup. Read the thread > "crease for ac3d files and speedup" if you like.) While I don't agree with your summary, I do apologize for going off the handle and getting defensive in this case. Thanks for your efforts and comments and I'm glad you still support the wiki. Simon _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
