| 1 |
Sven Vermeulen wrote: |
| 2 |
> I think we need to drop the incentive that the documentation on that |
| 3 |
> wiki is validated by a developer. The moment you work with |
| 4 |
> community-driven documentation, this is almost impossible to achieve. |
| 5 |
> In my opinion, the moment we would start a wiki, we use it for what it |
| 6 |
> is made for: community-driven documentation development. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Exactly. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> However, I would use the following practices: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> - Specific documentation that is "dangerous" to execute should have a |
| 13 |
> big red warning block, telling the users that this is not common |
| 14 |
> practice, is dangerous to execute, might result in yielding support |
| 15 |
> from developers, yada-yada. Examples of such topics could be |
| 16 |
> bootstrapping, editing portage code, specific C(XX)FLAGS, ... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Yes, I agree there should be indications of quality, possible danger, |
| 19 |
bleeding-edgeness and so on. As I already said, something similar to |
| 20 |
Wikipedia would work here, I think. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Ben de Groot |
| 24 |
Gentoo Linux developer (lxde, media, desktop-misc) |
| 25 |
Gentoo Linux Release Engineering PR liaison |
| 26 |
__________________________________________________ |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
yngwin@g.o |
| 29 |
http://ben.liveforge.org/ |
| 30 |
irc://chat.freenode.net/#gentoo-media |
| 31 |
irc://irc.oftc.net/#lxde |
| 32 |
__________________________________________________ |
Archives