| 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) |
Archives