1 |
On 4 April 2010 13:01, Joshua Saddler <nightmorph@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
[...] |
3 |
>> I am not pushing for our existing documentation to be migrated into a |
4 |
>> wiki at this point. But I think that once the place is there, and it |
5 |
>> functions well, it would be the obvious next step to do so. As I said |
6 |
>> before, the barrier to contributing and maintaining documentation is |
7 |
>> much higher in the case of GuideXML, so it doesn't really make sense |
8 |
>> to keep that around when we have a better solution. |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>> I know there are people who do not agree with me on this last point |
11 |
[... lots of good reasons to keep the documentation in GuideXML ...] |
12 |
|
13 |
I think the docs team has put in a huge amount of effort for a long |
14 |
time now to make well-formatted, easily readable documentation, and |
15 |
there really isn't a wiki solution out there that is remotely |
16 |
comparable. |
17 |
|
18 |
GuideXML isn't that hard to pick up, and I'm sure the docs team would |
19 |
be happy to help someone who's having trouble figuring out how to do |
20 |
something with it. So I *really* don't see "ease-of-use" being a good |
21 |
excuse for replacing GuideXML with a wiki. The difference in ease is |
22 |
not that high. |
23 |
|
24 |
[...] |
25 |
> I ain't out to stop ya'll from using a wiki. I do agree that they have some advantages. However, I will point out how limited wikis are. They're not a magic bullet that will solve all our problems. |
26 |
|
27 |
Again, I agree. We _should_ have a wiki for easy note-taking, |
28 |
maintaining todo lists, possibly even meeting minutes. But our |
29 |
official documentation should go through sufficient review and |
30 |
formatting to make sure we maintain the quality of documentation that |
31 |
we have had so far. |
32 |
|
33 |
Cheers, |
34 |
-- |
35 |
Arun Raghavan |
36 |
http://arunraghavan.net/ |
37 |
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME) |