| 1 |
On 12.11.2008 11:44, Michael Hammer wrote: |
| 2 |
> * Mark Loeser <halcy0n@g.o> [081112 00:46]: |
| 3 |
>> What are others feelings on this? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> I like the idea! |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> What issues do you see with having a wiki? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Pages of poor quality with wrong informations. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>> Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us having a |
| 12 |
>> wiki? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> We should develop some kind of review process |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Ugh, got lots of free time? If you want to help, provide hosting or |
| 17 |
such. A hands off approach should be preferred for wiki. We know it is |
| 18 |
written by users and some poor quality and even wrong info is expected. |
| 19 |
Wikis are good for pointers and ideas only. We know that and act |
| 20 |
accordingly. Moreover, we have official gentoo docs anyway. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Developer time is better spent doing, well, developer stuff rather than |
| 23 |
reviewing some wiki. If you insist on review, it will be at best a |
| 24 |
stale small site and at worst will cut into your developer time. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
For what it is worth, as a user I vote you spend time developing gentoo. |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Eray |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> and at least the |
| 31 |
> possiblity to lock and hide pages of poor quality. In the most cases |
| 32 |
> the howtos are related to some herds. What if we have a "reviewed |
| 33 |
> section" where herds can approve pages and user can be sure that the |
| 34 |
> infos provided have a minimum of quality. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> g, mueli |
| 37 |
> |
Archives