On May 7, 2008, at 10:09 AM, aranworld wrote:
> > It really helped with the ACL Component section, when you just posted > old content to use as a guideline. In general, if you in the dev team > have an outline of how things should be structured, just throw up some > empty sections. You already have done this to a certain extent, but > if you have even more of an idea of structure, it would be helpful. In the case of a section that existed in the 1.1 manual, we'll do this (I'm not aware of any sections that aren't up at this point). With new sections, I don't want outlines on the public site - I'd rather only publish finished content. If you're wondering about contributing something (especially something you've already written for your blog, project, or classwork), please send me an email. I'd love to help you work something in. > I am certainly guilty of writing long sections without ever checking. > I truly don't mind if they are used or not, because for the most part, > I am writing things down so that the information is clearer in my > mind. In many cases, the opportunity to sit down and write something > comes very unexpectedly, so there isn't time to check with anyone > first -- but this is why it is so important that ANY ideas the dev > team already have about how to organize the information should at a > very minimum be up on the site. And of course, if we could also view > the editing history of current sections, then we could get an idea of > what type of style you are looking for. One enhancement we're thinking of adding is some sort of needs page so that can coordinate new sections a bit better. I've already had times where two people wrote the same section and submitted it. It's the most pleasant sort of dilemma, but we want to cut down on needless parallel efforts as much as we can. Thanks, John > On May 7, 8:44 am, John David Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> On May 7, 2008, at 9:24 AM, aranworld wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> I really enjoy contributing to the official Cake Book, however, it >>> is >>> a very serious problem that the contribution and editing process >>> is so >>> obscure. The black box model absolutely does not work and >>> significantly reduces the incentive to contribute. >> >>> I have personally spent a lot of time working on various sections of >>> the Cake Book. Some modifications appear, some don't. I don't get >>> any real feedback on why some things appear and others don't. I >>> have >>> nothing to help me do a better job on future work. >> >>> With Wikipedia, where I also have contributed a bit over the >>> years, I >>> get to see a very transparent chain of feedback and edits on my own >>> contributions. This makes me much better at writing entries, and I >>> have found that my quality level has improved due to past feedback. >>> I think that if I ever wished the CakePHP docs were more like a >>> Wiki, >>> this kind of transparency is all I am asking for. I am not asking >>> for >>> the right to create my own articles or even the right to have my >>> edits >>> appear immediately. >> >>> For the time it takes me to make quality contributions, what I ask >>> for >>> in return is a transparent editing and revision process. >> >> 1. We're working on better communication for Cookbook edits and >> revisions >> >> 2. If you have any specific questions, please feel free to contact >> me. >> >> Most edits have been great, but there's been some cases where I've >> been rejecting edits: >> >> - The edit is incorrect (code-wise) >> - The contribution is a complete rewrite of an existing section >> >> If there are other problems, I try to fix it before I approve it. For >> really long sections that have been completely rewritten without even >> checking with me, I can't do much about that if the writing style is >> too different, or if the structure of the contribution doesn't match >> what we have planned. >> >> -- John >> >> P.S. - Ditto to what Nate said. >> >>> On May 7, 5:57 am, "Mariano Iglesias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>>> If you don't know what inflation is we have plenty of that in >>>> Argentina, and >>>> we can certainly spare some for you. >> >>>> -MI >> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>> CakeFest: December, 2008 - Buenos Aires, Argentina -http://www.cakefest.org >> >>>> blog:http://www.MarianoIglesias.com.ar >>>> twitter:http://twitter.com/mgiglesias >> >>>> -----Mensaje original----- >>>> De: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En >>>> nombre >>>> de nate >>>> Enviado el: Miércoles, 07 de Mayo de 2008 08:17 a.m. >>>> Para: CakePHP >>>> Asunto: Re: Is the documentation at book.cakephp.org open source? >> >>>> Inflation. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CakePHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
