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 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
> ;)), 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.


Reply via email to