We do have plans for a FAQ page; whether automated or manual it would make sense on the m.a.o page to me more than a separate doc, unless the separate doc was just a method to get collaborative input at first..
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 12:07 AM, Sebastian Schelter <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hm, > > I'm not so sure whether introducing another source for documentation than the > webpage would be so helpful (there still lots of work to do on the > website...), how do others see this? > > --sebastian > >> On 04/17/2014 05:06 PM, Jay Vyas wrote: >> Hi sebastian: theoretically, one could extract all the information from a >> mailing list search.... but i think a rolling FAQ would much more (1) be >> likely evolve into real documentation and (2) be more easily refined . Is >> that a little convincing ? If not i guess we can table the idea/// just a >> thought. >> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Sebastian Schelter <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jay, >>> >>> I'm not sure what the benefit of this approach is, people can already post >>> their questions to the mailinglist and get answers here, why would a google >>> doc be helpful? >>> >>> --sebastian >>> >>> >>>> On 04/16/2014 09:31 PM, Jay Vyas wrote: >>>> >>>> hi mahout... i finally thought of a really easy way of ad-hoc improvement >>>> of mahout docs, that can feed into the efforts to get formal docs >>>> improved. >>>> >>>> Any interest in creating a shared mahout FAQ file in a google doc.? >>>> >>>> we can easily start adding questions into it that point to obvious missing >>>> documentation parts, and mahout commiters can add responses below inline. >>>> then overtime we can take those questions/answers and turn them directly >>>> into real docs. >>>> >>>> I think this will make it easier for a broader range of people to rapidly >>>> improve mahout docs in an ad hoc sort of way. i for one will volunteer to >>>> help translate the QA stream into "real" documentation / JIRAs etc. >
