Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
On 10:44 Wed 12 Nov , Michael Hammer wrote: * Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081112 00:46]: What issues do you see with having a wiki? Pages of poor quality with wrong informations. The wiki already exists and is popular, so these already happen. Even if it's not official it says gentoo and people will associate it with their Gentoo experience regardless of whether we host it. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com pgpTJ8aNJkR7r.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
On 16:52 Tue 11 Nov , Joe Peterson wrote: As for Wikipedia, there is always the fear that the info will be incorrect, but time has shown that wikis tend to be very accurate and get corrected quickly when not. A page's likelihood of correctness is roughly inversely proportional to its popularity. Try a specialized topic outside of computers, and there may well be errors that only an expert will catch -- others will just be deceived. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com pgpVthBP3nkdD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:45:32 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? What will policy on articles that are horribly dangerous or outright wrong? Is Gentoo prepared to block or warn about articles that recommend stupid things? If a warning is used, what will be used to distinguish between a generic wiki, not necessarily checked by sane people and a article known to be horrible? Wikipedia started using an extension for marking pages as validated. See [1]. This would allow us to setup a group of trusted people (developers, long-time users, well-known contributors - for example) who would be able to review pages and tag them that way. Non-reviewed pages could show a header then clearly stating that this specific page hasn't been reviewed and might contain inaccurate information. Tobias [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Jan Kundrát wrote: kashani wrote: How easy is it to checkout current GDP docs Append ?passthru=1 to the end of the URL. and make changes to them? I take it you want to make a patch. In such case, edit the file and submit the diff via Bugzilla. Cheers, -jkt Or use anoncvs for the gentoo module. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Are you considering to replace the mediawiki with a different wiki system such as moinmoin? On Wednesday 12 November 2008 7:49:58 am Michael Hammer wrote: * Gokdeniz Karadag [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081112 13:06]: Petteri Räty demis ki:: Michael Hammer wrote: We should develop some kind of review process and at least the possiblity to lock and hide pages of poor quality. In the most cases the howtos are related to some herds. What if we have a reviewed section where herds can approve pages and user can be sure that the infos provided have a minimum of quality. We already have a reviewed section. It's called GDP. You're fully right! The GDP can therefore be the reviewed sections where documents from the wiki are transfered to. The wiki can be a staging ground for user contributed documents, which can become part of official docs after a review and cleanup by developers. That's the way I intended my proposal. As some kind of early state GDP documents. It's an unwritten fact that user are willing to contribute to wiki systems - but I've never received an xml file for our GDP written by a user ;) ... The wiki can be the place to develop new howtos by disburding the devs - IMHO. g, mueli
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Michael Hammer wrote: The wiki can be a staging ground for user contributed documents, which can become part of official docs after a review and cleanup by developers. ...as long as they use a compatible license, is not the case right now (and never was, IIRC). That's the way I intended my proposal. As some kind of early state GDP documents. It's an unwritten fact that user are willing to contribute to wiki systems - but I've never received an xml file for our GDP written by a user ;) ... The wiki can be the place to develop new howtos by disburding the devs - IMHO. Contrary to popular belief, we (the GDP) don't require submissions in any particular format. We have plenty of monkeys that can convert just about anything to our fancy internal format. We do our best to communicate this fact to other people in Gentoo, but apparently it's a tough job, as I don't recall much submissions in non-XML form. Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub more beer /dev/mouth signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Michael Hammer wrote: * Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081112 00:46]: What are others feelings on this? I like the idea! What issues do you see with having a wiki? Pages of poor quality with wrong informations. Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? We should develop some kind of review process and at least the possiblity to lock and hide pages of poor quality. In the most cases the howtos are related to some herds. What if we have a reviewed section where herds can approve pages and user can be sure that the infos provided have a minimum of quality. g, mueli We already have a reviewed section. It's called GDP. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
* Gokdeniz Karadag [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081112 13:06]: Petteri Räty demis ki:: Michael Hammer wrote: We should develop some kind of review process and at least the possiblity to lock and hide pages of poor quality. In the most cases the howtos are related to some herds. What if we have a reviewed section where herds can approve pages and user can be sure that the infos provided have a minimum of quality. We already have a reviewed section. It's called GDP. You're fully right! The GDP can therefore be the reviewed sections where documents from the wiki are transfered to. The wiki can be a staging ground for user contributed documents, which can become part of official docs after a review and cleanup by developers. That's the way I intended my proposal. As some kind of early state GDP documents. It's an unwritten fact that user are willing to contribute to wiki systems - but I've never received an xml file for our GDP written by a user ;) ... The wiki can be the place to develop new howtos by disburding the devs - IMHO. g, mueli -- Michael Hammer|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Graz, AT Gentoo Developer (Kerberos) | http://www.michael-hammer.at pgpXImZvVf3Nc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Petteri Räty demis ki:: Michael Hammer wrote: * Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081112 00:46]: What are others feelings on this? I like the idea! What issues do you see with having a wiki? Pages of poor quality with wrong informations. Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? We should develop some kind of review process and at least the possiblity to lock and hide pages of poor quality. In the most cases the howtos are related to some herds. What if we have a reviewed section where herds can approve pages and user can be sure that the infos provided have a minimum of quality. g, mueli We already have a reviewed section. It's called GDP. Regards, Petteri The wiki can be a staging ground for user contributed documents, which can become part of official docs after a review and cleanup by developers. -- Gokdeniz Karadag
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Gokdeniz Karadag wrote: The wiki can be a staging ground for user contributed documents, which can become part of official docs after a review and cleanup by developers. . . . no, I'd think not. 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 meritsas 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 http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xfce-config.xml ;)), 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. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
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 meritsas 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 http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xfce-config.xml ;)), 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. -Joe
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Jan Kundrát wrote: Michael Hammer wrote: The wiki can be a staging ground for user contributed documents, which can become part of official docs after a review and cleanup by developers. ...as long as they use a compatible license, is not the case right now (and never was, IIRC). That's the way I intended my proposal. As some kind of early state GDP documents. It's an unwritten fact that user are willing to contribute to wiki systems - but I've never received an xml file for our GDP written by a user ;) ... The wiki can be the place to develop new howtos by disburding the devs - IMHO. Contrary to popular belief, we (the GDP) don't require submissions in any particular format. We have plenty of monkeys that can convert just about anything to our fancy internal format. We do our best to communicate this fact to other people in Gentoo, but apparently it's a tough job, as I don't recall much submissions in non-XML form. How easy is it to checkout current GDP docs and make changes to them? I believe I looked into updating the old and crufty Virtual Mail How-to and decided it was easier to create a new one at gentoo-wiki. kashani
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
kashani wrote: How easy is it to checkout current GDP docs Append ?passthru=1 to the end of the URL. and make changes to them? I take it you want to make a patch. In such case, edit the file and submit the diff via Bugzilla. Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub more beer /dev/mouth signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
* Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081112 00:46]: What are others feelings on this? I like the idea! What issues do you see with having a wiki? Pages of poor quality with wrong informations. Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? We should develop some kind of review process and at least the possiblity to lock and hide pages of poor quality. In the most cases the howtos are related to some herds. What if we have a reviewed section where herds can approve pages and user can be sure that the infos provided have a minimum of quality. g, mueli -- Michael Hammer|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Graz, AT Gentoo Developer (Kerberos) | http://www.michael-hammer.at pgp5ShaoKtcXa.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
On 12.11.2008 11:44, Michael Hammer wrote: * Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081112 00:46]: What are others feelings on this? I like the idea! What issues do you see with having a wiki? Pages of poor quality with wrong informations. Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? We should develop some kind of review process Ugh, got lots of free time? If you want to help, provide hosting or such. A hands off approach should be preferred for wiki. We know it is written by users and some poor quality and even wrong info is expected. Wikis are good for pointers and ideas only. We know that and act accordingly. Moreover, we have official gentoo docs anyway. Developer time is better spent doing, well, developer stuff rather than reviewing some wiki. If you insist on review, it will be at best a stale small site and at worst will cut into your developer time. For what it is worth, as a user I vote you spend time developing gentoo. -- Eray and at least the possiblity to lock and hide pages of poor quality. In the most cases the howtos are related to some herds. What if we have a reviewed section where herds can approve pages and user can be sure that the infos provided have a minimum of quality. g, mueli
[gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
So, gentoo-wiki.com went down for a awhile and took something away from our users something that is useful. Its back now, but I think we should consider having our own official wiki that our users can contribute to. We already have something very similar to this on the forums, and this would just give the correct tool to put their documentation on. I already know some people are going to hate this idea and say that the documentation could be wrong, etc, so lets look at how others have handled this situation. It seems that Ubuntu has their own official documentation section and a community section where users can contribute to. We can put a nice big warning saying that the user documentation may have some errors, and that any such errors should not be directed at the maintainers of the package or the GDP. What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? -- Mark Loeser email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://www.halcy0n.com pgpR4907laveX.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Mark Loeser wrote: What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? +1! I have set up several wikis for work projects and used many others to great benefit. Even those (on my work projects) who were skeptical at first warmed to the idea and quickly became dependent on such tools. As for Wikipedia, there is always the fear that the info will be incorrect, but time has shown that wikis tend to be very accurate and get corrected quickly when not. -Joe
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Mark Loeser wrote: So, gentoo-wiki.com went down for a awhile and took something away from our users something that is useful. Its back now, but I think we should consider having our own official wiki that our users can contribute to. We already have something very similar to this on the forums, and this would just give the correct tool to put their documentation on. I already know some people are going to hate this idea and say that the documentation could be wrong, etc, so lets look at how others have handled this situation. It seems that Ubuntu has their own official documentation section and a community section where users can contribute to. We can put a nice big warning saying that the user documentation may have some errors, and that any such errors should not be directed at the maintainers of the package or the GDP. What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? I've asked my fellow GDP members to weigh in on this issue on our ML; the discussion is already in-progress here: http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-doc/msg_dd4f573fc6384108fdf14dfa27030906.xml Or, if you like it gmane-style: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.documentation/2903 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:45:32 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, gentoo-wiki.com went down for a awhile and took something away from our users something that is useful. Its back now, but I think we should consider having our own official wiki that our users can contribute to. We already have something very similar to this on the forums, and this would just give the correct tool to put their documentation on. I already know some people are going to hate this idea and say that the documentation could be wrong, etc, so lets look at how others have handled this situation. It seems that Ubuntu has their own official documentation section and a community section where users can contribute to. We can put a nice big warning saying that the user documentation may have some errors, and that any such errors should not be directed at the maintainers of the package or the GDP. What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? I'm for it. I think the positives --- more communications paths, community building, providing something our users want --- outweigh the negatives (entries might be incorrect or irrelevant or whatever). I think it's understood that contributions might contain errors, but the can be corrected. I don't know about Ubuntu's community section, but I do find Wikipedia very useful even though I know it might be wrong. :) -- Mark Loeser email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://www.halcy0n.com Regards, Ferris -- Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Userrel, Trustees) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Mark Loeser wrote: So, gentoo-wiki.com went down for a awhile and took something away from our users something that is useful. Its back now, but I think we should consider having our own official wiki that our users can contribute to. We already have something very similar to this on the forums, and this would just give the correct tool to put their documentation on. I already know some people are going to hate this idea and say that the documentation could be wrong, etc, so lets look at how others have handled this situation. [snip] IMHO, the old gentoo-wiki (don't know if the new one will address it) does let you down when pages are out of date. The solution I like is the wikipedia idea: There is a tag for marking pages as outdated / inaccurate, and if a page has the outdated tag for too long it's removed / archived. Much like treecleaning! -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au You know you're using the computer too much when: refer to traffic lights as routers. -- C J Pro
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:45:32 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? What will policy on articles that are horribly dangerous or outright wrong? Is Gentoo prepared to block or warn about articles that recommend stupid things? If a warning is used, what will be used to distinguish between a generic wiki, not necessarily checked by sane people and a article known to be horrible? The problem with wikis is that enough of them contain enough good information that people assume that all of them are entirely correct. Even if warnings are used, the assumption is often well I was warned about another article too and that turned out OK so I can ignore the warning. And whilst it might be OK for some people to say well, we warned you, so tough luck, it makes life very difficult for developers who end up having to deal with hordes of users with broken systems... -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Hi, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:45:32 -0500 Mark Loeser[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? What will policy on articles that are horribly dangerous or outright wrong? see my previous email - wikipedia looks like they're writing a robot to deal with Articles that need attention[1]. We could do the same, there's nothing stopping us from deleting really bad pages. (archives are always available for someone who wants to revive and improve them). There's also the huge amount of Cleanup tags[2] which I really like (the principle, not the huge amount). We could tailor this however we wanted. Is Gentoo prepared to block or warn about articles that recommend stupid things? I think we definitely should. Someone needs to discover that the article does so first! If a warning is used, what will be used to distinguish between a generic wiki, not necessarily checked by sane people and a article known to be horrible? Cleanup tags! One for each. Nice notice written at the top of the article saying exactly what you've said. The problem with wikis is that enough of them contain enough good information that people assume that all of them are entirely correct. sure, but isn't that similar to, say, a forum? Even if warnings are used, the assumption is often well I was warned about another article too and that turned out OK so I can ignore the warning. sure, some users are idiots :) Better idiot proofing doesn't protect you - it only creates better idiots. (I don't have a reference for this one). And whilst it might be OK for some people to say well, we warned you, so tough luck, it makes life very difficult for developers who end up having to deal with hordes of users with broken systems... I agree tough luck might be a response by some, so the user will go to the next person to help. I don't think this would necessarily fall back to developers. Just like forums, mailing lists and the current wiki, there is good and bad advice. From my experience on the gentoo-user list, bad advice generally gets noticed and corrected reasonably quickly. Even big stuffups (oops I unmerged python) are helped. There is a good culture on the user list which still calls an idiot an idiot. The common one being people using ~ARCH on a remote production box, then complaining it broke for a ~ related reason, adding that they have no physical access (it happens often enough). The usual response is you shouldn't have done it, you were warned, here's how to fix it. I see no problem with this. it makes life very difficult for developers who end up having to deal with hordes of users with broken systems... The only place where I could see specific developer loading, is users who take their problems as a result of following bad advice to bugzilla. I wouldn't expect the hordes would go there first... Anyway, the wiki exists with all it's bad advice already. Making it official would only improve it and hence reduce developer loading, IMHO. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pages_needing_attention [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cleanup_resources cya, -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au Only great masters of style can succeed in being obtuse. -- Oscar Wilde
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Mark Loeser wrote: So, gentoo-wiki.com went down for a awhile and took something away from our users something that is useful. Its back now, but I think we should consider having our own official wiki that our users can contribute to. We already have something very similar to this on the forums, and this would just give the correct tool to put their documentation on. I already know some people are going to hate this idea and say that the documentation could be wrong, etc, so lets look at how others have handled this situation. It seems that Ubuntu has their own official documentation section and a community section where users can contribute to. We can put a nice big warning saying that the user documentation may have some errors, and that any such errors should not be directed at the maintainers of the package or the GDP. What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a wiki? I have been following gentoo-wiki's new procedures and rebuild process and I think they are on a good track right now. I am throwing this out there, can we ask Mike Valstar for a dump of all his stuff, slap it on gentoo hardware under a wiki.gentoo.org link? It could be a community building experience and offering the stability of gentoo hardware to a service like gentoo-wiki. Maybe also invite Mike to be the admin of said hardware, etc. Thoughts? (I don't know what a community wiki would require for infra hardware, maybe someone will chime in) 2 cents, Jeremy
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 08:39:41PM -0600, Jeremy Olexa wrote: I am throwing this out there, can we ask Mike Valstar for a dump of all his stuff, slap it on gentoo hardware under a wiki.gentoo.org link? It could be a community building experience and offering the stability of gentoo hardware to a service like gentoo-wiki. Maybe also invite Mike to be the admin of said hardware, etc. Thoughts? I'd like to answer this on two fronts. As infra, I did offer hosting to Mike Valstar shortly after their downtime started. However he turned me down as somebody else offered him much beefier hardware (overkill hardware in my personal opinion). An additional minor concern were the Google ads he runs, which might not be possible at some of our sponsors. My offer for remote backups for him still stands, and I have not received any response on it from Mike. Additionally, there are license concerns about their existing content, as it was originally one license, and was then blanket re-licensed (see the mails on the gentoo-doc list for more details). Any new Gentoo-run wiki could enforce our docs license of CC-Attribution/ShareALike from the start. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpXHDc3y246w.pgp Description: PGP signature
