Chris Cannam wrote: > > Ah, now you see I've always disliked wikis. I've never seen a good > one. They strike me as exactly the sort of thing that technical > types love but that are next to useless for real people (until they > go completely stale, and then they're _actually_ useless). I mean > yes, I can see the point, it's just that no, I don't think the point > ever really translates into a working reality. > > I dunno though, maybe I'm blinkered.
I'm very surprised by your opinion of Wikis. Wikis are to websites what closed-source software is to open-source software. Whether or not a Wiki goes stale is surely a function of its audience rather than of the Wiki technology itself. As an example of a healthy Wiki, the Wikipedia www.wikipedia.org is an excellent encyclopedia which is used regularly by thousands of "real" people, who are actively encouraged to participate in its development. As for Rosegarden, I think a Wiki would be ideally suited to the documentation of every aspect of the software. Indeed I wrote a very short page on Rosegarden at the Alsa Wiki http://alsa.opensrc.org/index.php?page=rosegarden It's still waiting to be improved and extended. William ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now, one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
