I can understand the love'em / hate'm positions regarding wikis, however I couldn't help but notice that some of the arguments below are very close to what used to be said by corporations about open source projects and development methodologies
All wikis don't have to be wikipedias; they can help build collaboratively information without anonymous contributions and with clearly defined participation roles from the team members. In such a context, it can still simplify collective review and speeds up the turn around time. We're probably dealing with the classical reaction / counter-reaction surrounding any new technology; step #1 "it'll solve all our problems!" step #2 "wait, it is now our main problem" step #3 "we should use it only for what it's good for..." -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Kölling Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 14:16 To: discuss@ppig.org Subject: Re: PPIG discuss: Documentation for large systems Wiki? Obligatory?? I don't believe in wikis at all. I know there is (still) a lot of hype around them, but I think it is a complete myth that they work. There is somehow the wishful thinking that the documents (documentation, in this case) write themselves. The hive-mind will fix it. "The community" (or "all the company") will write it. The result, much more often than not in my experience, is a document that nobody takes responsibility for, that has very weak overall structure, and random level of detail over various parts. No guarantee that important information is represented appropriately at all. I'd like to know who to kick if the document sucks. Michael ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PPIG Discuss List (discuss@ppig.org) Discuss admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/discuss Announce admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/announce PPIG Discuss archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/
