Gentoo Archives: gentoo-doc

From: wireless <wireless@×××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-doc@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-doc] Re: okupy, a Django rewrite of www.g.o
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 17:24:00
Message-Id: 4DE7C6E9.8070802@tampabay.rr.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-doc] Re: okupy, a Django rewrite of www.g.o by "Jan Kundrát"
1 On 06/02/11 08:15, Jan Kundrát wrote:
2 > On 06/02/11 13:54, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
3 >> Hey man, relax! :)
4 >> I'm also a translator, I have some ideas/needs that need to implement.
5 >> I was going to ask you (you as in other translators) for additional
6 >> ideas, I just didn't get there yet, i'm still struggling with the LDAP
7 >> backend for the time being.
8
9 > Theo, I'm not sure how to articulate my point in a better way here. I
10 > would've thought that you would ask your target audience *before* you
11 > got your project approved.
12
13 > Anyway, I said what I wanted to say, so let's just use this opportunity
14 > to produce something useful. /me crosses fingers.
15
16 EVERYONE is missing the point, imho.
17
18 ANY documentation system *should* have a facility where anyone can
19 create content, quickly and not as part of the *glorified* official
20 documentation. Fast moving technologies, such as open-source software
21 would do much to *EXCITE* the user base, if documentations was easy,
22 a little sloppy on form and features, but *CURRENT* on key information.
23 In lieu of this sort of scenario, folks repeatedly handle support, via
24 a variety of means.
25
26 As the content gets refined and becomes quite reasonable (as usually
27 happens over time) *THEN* it can be put into proper form. The lack of
28 this sort of "quick and easy" approach leads to too many
29 details that make Gentoo Documentation, substandard (not current)
30 at best. At all if you ask most folks, the freshness of current content
31 far outweighs the importance of appearance, for documentation. Hundreds
32 of times I have sent private email to folks of sloppy content notes
33 on how I fixed something, and *EVERYTIME* they are most grateful for
34 the currentness of the information, despite it being just a sloppy
35 (VI) raw-text file. *PRETTY without CONCURRENCY* is mostly useless,
36 imho. Just look at the docs related to building a software raid
37 system for a new gentoo installation, for example. Pathetic!
38 Yet software raid is a fundamental need that needs to converted into
39 a "GENTOO COMMODITY", imho.
40
41
42 Over the last 7 years, I've watched hundreds of very smart and
43 reasonable folks come to gentoo, want to update or create good
44 documentation and work *WITH* the gentoo devs. Hard-line attitudes
45 cause them to leave, quickly, in many circumstances. Documentation,
46 is quite often the key issue.
47
48 Time and again the arcane gymnastics that are employed (to a point
49 of cult worship) take precedence on content enhancement. Until this
50 is fixed (technically and attitudinally) you'll never keep up on
51 documentation or attracting bright folks to contribute to docs.
52
53 So most technical folks that stay with Gentoo, just fade into the
54 background........
55
56 That is what needs fixing *OVERWHELMINGLY* compared to any of these
57 other trite issues and fiefdoms.......
58
59 If you really want this maze to create documents, then *FIRST* create
60 the docs that folks can follow to create acceptable docs. Keeping this
61 sort of *CLEAR* information from the masses is the equivalent of
62 Fiefdom, or at least that is the appearance that others perceive.
63 Me, I just make my own docs and do not worry about sharing them
64 because the overall attitude of the those that control Gentoo,
65 particular the DOC teams.....imho.
66
67 I'm very sorry if this sort of email hurts anyone's feelings, but,
68 you really should live where the average user lives for a few days
69 and LISTEN for a bit. Gentoo is no longer a "sole proprietor system"
70 it is a multi-national conglomerate and documentation should be the
71 first training ground for those seeking the "DEV" status, imho.
72
73
74 apologetically,
75 James

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-doc] Re: okupy, a Django rewrite of www.g.o Nils Larsson <ni1s@×××××××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-doc] Re: okupy, a Django rewrite of www.g.o "Jan Kundrát" <jkt@g.o>