On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:26 AM, Dieter Plaetinck <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:09:26 +0200 > Dario Giovannetti <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:46:15 -0400 > Jeremiah Dodds <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 from me, people who don't qualify as "beginners" (to linux) will > > just skip over extra information in the guide, and people who are > > will benefit from the simplification. > > It's really not this simple. > If you put everything in one guide, that means many more contributions > will need to go through git, which is not desirable (because it's less > convenient) > Forgive my ignorance, but how would this mean that many more contributions would have to go through git? Also, less convenient than what? > > Ideally, the wiki would use a git backend and provide an easy interface > to submit, preview and validate contributions. that would combine all > the requirements (quality review, plaintext version, commits in aif > git can comprise changes to both code and the guide, and ease of > contributions because of the wiki UI) but that's not how it is... > Storing the official guide in the wiki is not possible because of > reasons mentioned above. > > Make the official guide it's own git repo, use it as a submodule in aif, and set up a hook to wikify / unwikify as appropriate? That's an out-of-the-ass idea though, I'm not currently familiar enough with Arch's setup in terms of repos and where everything is coming from to know if that's a good, let alone viable or shortest-path solution. On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Heiko Baums <[email protected]> wrote: > Am Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:26:21 +0200 The "Official Install Guide" should be kept as a "Quick Install Reference" for more experienced users, what it in fact is, and the "Beginner's Guide" as a more detailed install guide for less experienced users and beginners. I think this is also a decent idea, the main goal should be to remove ambiguity as to what guide people, especially newbies, should be looking at.
