| 1 |
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> But in my experience, crappy and easy |
| 4 |
> is a better way to get people to contribute. When I've taken wiki |
| 5 |
> documents and moved them into git repos, more often than not I become |
| 6 |
> the sole contributor, and otherwise-technical people just start emailing |
| 7 |
> me their contributions (which decrease greatly in frequency). |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I'd tend to agree if people could actually edit stuff on the Wiki. |
| 11 |
The problem is that there is really no way to do the equivalent of a |
| 12 |
pull request or other review process on a Wiki. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Either we open pages up, in which case we have to watch them for |
| 15 |
changes we don't want. Or we don't open them up, in which case |
| 16 |
suggesting patches is a royal pain. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I've wanted to propose more significant changes to the handbook and it |
| 19 |
is hard to do because I can't just offer one big patch that people can |
| 20 |
comment on. I could start making little changes here and there but |
| 21 |
until they're all done it will be inconsistent, and it makes it harder |
| 22 |
to influence the overall direction. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Rich |
Archives