Michael Lefevre wrote: > CVS is part of the problem, but I don't think it's the biggest part. > Although I've only been around for a short part of the history of it, the > problem seems to me to be that the website is managed by hundreds of > different people, most of whom have long since gone away, and nobody has > both the authority and the time to do anything about it.
It's because we don't have any structure for new contributor. If you write a doc, you either need to maintain it or track down someone else who can do this. So we have a situation where people who need help cannot find help, and people who want to help has nothing to help with. > Each change has > to be accompanied by attempts to track down people that don't communicate > and/or don't exist, and usually a group debate on the merits of the > changes are, who the audience is supposed to be, whose content is best, > what the views of someone that isn't communicating might be, and the fact > that the system doesn't work and wouldn't Zope have been good. That happens when we are dealing with doc written long ago and hasn't been updated since. What's cool about MSDN is that on top of every page is the publish date (and software version applicability), so MS has an excuse not to update old docs. Perhaps we should have a structure/rule to simply mark old docs as obsolete and replace them with new ones? > We also > seem to have a large number of people keen to contribute to meta > discussion and technical tweaking, and a small number of people actually > willing and able to write content. That's a thing in the past. I haven't seen much meta discussion, and I think most of us have learned from the bad experience :-) _______________________________________________ mozilla-documentation mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-documentation
