On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Steve Bennett<[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Chad<[email protected]> wrote: >> A lot of the docs have been written by people other than developers, > > Ever met a developer who likes writing doc? :) >
Hehe, I've worked in IT for several years now. Nobody likes to :) >> and a lot of the docs have never been read by a developer. That being >> said, using FlaggedRevs we might be able to deliver more solid docs >> on MW.org by flagging docs at like two levels. One could be like a basic >> "has been looked over for glaring errors and basic readability" and >> a second could be "has been thoroughly reviewed and is considered >> the doc on the given subject." > > Perhaps we could start by getting developers to thoroughly review > documentation? > > You're proposing a technical solution to a people problem. The problem > is not that the site can't display the fact that a developer vouches > for the quality of documentation. The problem is that there are no > processes for getting developers to review documentation and vouch for > it. > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > I try to ensure my documentation is thorough as I write it. That being said, there's still plenty out there that needs review. I'm just suggesting FlaggedRevs as a mechanism to aid in that. To further expand on my original statements, I'm not suggesting the developers are the only ones with in-depth knowledge of how Mediawiki works. There are certainly other members of the community we can trust to handle this task as well. I'm looking at this primarily as tools to aid in fixing a problem. Of course without work on part of document writers/reviewers, this won't go anywhere. -Chad -Chad _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
