| 1 |
Xavier Neys wrote: |
| 2 |
> Just let it live its wiki life. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Please let's make sure it is 'officially *hosted*' and it clearly states its |
| 5 |
> content is user-driven and not sanctioned in any way by Gentoo. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Xavier, thanks for your input; it's appreciated. Your proposal makes |
| 8 |
sense, but I think it's actually untenable in the long run. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
We're going to see what we already have now: a conflict between the wiki |
| 11 |
and the "official" documentation. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
"Well, the wiki says this, but the official docs say this." |
| 14 |
"Which do I follow?" |
| 15 |
"Well, the official docs are wrong/out-of-date, just do the wiki, even |
| 16 |
though it's harder to follow." Etc. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
This is why I feel having a wiki really *is* relevant to the GDP. We'll |
| 19 |
be running into the problem we have now, which is essentially a fork in |
| 20 |
our documentation, whether that documentation is primarily contributed |
| 21 |
by users or developers. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Also, if we do have a wiki, why shouldn't the *GDP* embrace it in some |
| 24 |
way? My reasoning here is that we have so little contribution from |
| 25 |
*anyone* these days, users or developers. Yes, Gentoo is known for its |
| 26 |
accurate, in-depth official documentation, but it's also known for the |
| 27 |
wealth of user-contributed articles. I think there will be problems on |
| 28 |
down the road if we continue to keep the two completely separate; we're |
| 29 |
seeing this even now. There may be some merit in attempting to merge |
| 30 |
these disparate documentation bases. Maybe it could be a way to increase |
| 31 |
participation from the community. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
> Use a license that would allow some content to be reused in our docs, you |
| 34 |
> never know, maybe some articles might be worth it. |
| 35 |
> gentoo-wiki.com used to use GFDL license (Public Domain was also mentioned, so |
| 36 |
> no one knows what license people thought they were contributing under). |
| 37 |
> When pointed out to that fact, they blanket relicensed everything under Public |
| 38 |
> Domain. Now they use CC-BY-NC-SA. How would we credit everyone if any article |
| 39 |
> was to be reused? |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Yup, licensing is important; at least Gentoo would control the license |
| 42 |
from the start, since as you say gentoo-wiki.com blanket relicensed |
| 43 |
content many times over the years. |
Archives