The Tryphon wiki is great, but still very disorganized, and trying to repair it would, imho, be counterproductive - a fresh start would be best for everyone, and the Tryphon wiki is still there to continue being the great resource it is alongside any new documentation written. There's a huge amount of content there but if average users visit it, all they get is a huge pile of fairly niche documentation, none of which is "Rivendell 101". I think we need to do something more structured and more carefully built to avoid the sort of huge pile-up we have on the Tryphon wiki.
Cheers, James On 12/01/2012 02:25, Geoff Barkman wrote: > Hi James > I agree the documentation needs work done on it. > I think the Tryphon Wiki is the best source. Google has indexed it I believe. > Frederick Henderson spent a lot of time about a year ago tidying the > wiki up. He has done a nice job:). But due to work commitments has > had to put his Rivendell work on hold. He still is on this mailing > list so pops up from time to time. > That's the good thing about open source... you can help any way you > want. Some are coders... some are docu writers... some make coffee... > > Cheers > Geoff Barkman (aka username madmilkie on the wiki) > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:04 PM, James Harrison > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> So right now we have two main sources of documentation to point people at: >> >> * The ROG >> * The tryphon wiki >> >> There's some issues here: >> >> * The ROG is outdated and while often useful, sometimes misleading and >> hard to reference >> * The tryphon wiki is similar, with the added bonus of being full of >> useful use-case demonstrations and contributed documentation - but it's >> not very well organized or presented, and is hard to find things on. >> >> Documentation is really important for Rivendell to succeed and is one >> area we can, as a community, really help out on. We can't all write >> C/C++, and those of us who can often don't feel comfortable leaping into >> as large and complex a project as Rivendell. >> >> I'd like to propose a solution from the community. We all want good >> docs, and personally I'm happy spending some spare hours documenting >> Rivendell, even though I'm no longer involved at a station running it. >> I'm sure people who have stations running it would be up for helping to >> better document the system for the benefit of their station and others. >> We've got the manpower, we need some structure. >> >> So, my proposal is this: >> >> * We set up a new, blank, completely fresh wiki. This could be hosted by >> Paravel or hosted by the community - I'd be happy to host it if nobody >> else is. MediaWiki is a good tool for documentation, and is open to >> everyone (as long as there's some anti-spam measures in place). >> * We work out some good rules of thumb for presenting sorts of >> information, and set up templates for categorization and basic information. >> * We set up a structure, dividing the wiki into: >> ** Concepts, Design and Technical Information - What it is and how it >> works, the basics and the details. >> ** Installation - How to get Rivendell from "I have a computer running >> X" to "playing audio out 24/7 randomly picked from the library" as >> simply as possible >> ** Usage - Basic Rivendell usage, documentation on how to use features, >> what all the apps do. How to set up complex stuff like clocks, logs, >> music scheduling internally or with an external program, and so on. >> ** Examples - Use cases and examples of how to set up Rivendell to >> accomplish common tasks or pull off complex configurations >> >> We could split up the categories, especially under usage/examples, to >> expand further on topics like scheduling, log editing and generation, >> and library management. We should have good defined ways to present >> things like source code, shell scripts, and commands for users to run, >> and so on, for examples and extensions. >> >> I really think Rivendell could benefit a lot from improved documentation >> - good docs and manuals help sway people unsure of an open source >> product where commercial support is unavailable or hard to come by (the >> USA has Paravel, the EU has a few companies, but plenty of countries >> have no commercial support), and for some stations it isn't an option. >> More users means more feedback and a bigger community and that's a win >> for everyone. >> >> Does this sound like a plan? Is anyone else interested in helping write >> the best documentation for the best open source playout system? Am I >> missing anything huge? Am I mad? >> >> Cheers, >> James Harrison >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rivendell-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.rivendellaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev > _______________________________________________ > Rivendell-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.rivendellaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev _______________________________________________ Rivendell-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rivendellaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev
