Dag Wieers wrote:
Whats the aim of creating duplicate content and thereby creating more
legacy ?
The aim would be that more people could actually improve the content,
instead of having it sit there, look ugly and not helping with donations
at all.
If there is such a mass of humanity looking to improve the content, why
is that effort not directed at fixing the issues with the website ?
If you want me to say we should replace the Website by the Wiki, I will :)
you can say that if you like, but its not going to happen.
Sorry, but every link from the wiki going to the website is but-ugly,
looks disconnected and unprofessional.
so why band-aid rather than fix the problem ?
Right, and the website obviously is much better in providing content to
users (not).
the website gets a magnitude of more traffic than the wiki, so I'd say
yes its a better mechanism at the moment.
Sorry Karanbir, we could argue about the principles of having a website
and a wiki, but as long as the website is in the state it is now I would
*never* recommend anyone to go to the website.
but you dont want to make any efforts to fix that situation ?
Right, we could discuss what news-item to put on the frontpage, but I
think it is important to also put highlights on the wiki simply because
nobody ever visits both.
I'd like to see what analytics were used in reaching that decision.
- KB
_______________________________________________
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
