Ah, I guess I never saw a rundown of the choices that were made.
Could you point me to them?
-Dylan
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Pete Travis
<me(a)petetravis.com> wrote:
> Ahem. Mail client operator fail, trying again.
> On Aug 12, 2016 10:12 AM, "Dylan Combs"
> <dylan.combs(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don't mean to just beat a perhaps-dead horse, but I really can't
> > get past the opposition (which I don't understand) to a wiki-like
> > environment for our documentation which would facilitate this very
> > thing.
> >
> > I know there are concerns about "gardening" such a wiki, but
> > seriously, if we can put in place a system similar to
> >
ask.fedoraproject.org where users are provided badges and karma
> > for their work, I think that's the best we can do to promote user
> > involvement in conjunction with an easy click-and-you're-in system
> > for people to simply edit the content they're reading at that very
> > moment, in real time.
> >
> > I know I would contribute heavily to such an environment. I
> > contribute heavily to
ask.fedoraproject.org in no small part
> > because I can quantify my involvement, and this helps in a lot of
> > ways people might not expect; I have even used my contributions to
> >
ask.fedoraproject.org as validation of my skills for my employer.
> > I have used it in job applications and resumes to demonstrate the
> > quality of my writing and my ability to solve a variety of
> > problems.
> >
> > If we could just simplify the documentation process by providing
> > an easily-edited repository with a service that quantifies user
> > involvement, that, in my estimation, is the best model for
> > maintaining active, accurate documentation for our user base. It
> > dramatically simplifies the involvement process (getting into
> >
ask.fedoraproject.org is so easy, new accounts pop up all the
> > time, and contributions even from low-level accounts have been
> > very valuable), it makes the whole thing accessible, and for long-
> > term contributors, it provides a means by which to quantify and
> > qualify their involvement in the Fedora community, and this is a
> > feature that can be used by anyone for whatever purpose they may
> > have.
> >
> > Our current system is extremely opaque, and the documentation
> > is relatively static. We have to change that, in my opinion,
> > and a simple Wiki with a user base consisting of moderators and
> > contributors, managed by a karma and badge system, is the way
> > to go.
> >
> > I only propose this, yet again, because I just don't see the
> > rationale in its opposition. It seems to have elicited a few
> > relatively enthusiastic notes of support from this distribution
> > group along with a few somewhat vague concerns which I think have
> > been addressed.
> >
> > Can we just chase this one down and prove that it is either
> > unsuitable or valid as a solution for our issue? We gotta move on
> > this!
> >
> > -Dylan
> >
> >
> We did already chase this idea down and determine that a wiki was not
> suitable for a variety of reasons, which I will not reiterate in this
> thread. The discussion has moved on to implementation of the choices
> we've made. No, you won't have the new easier contribution path
> until more of this implementation work is done. Revisiting the
> platform discussion only adds stop energy at this point, let's please
> focus on executing the chosen path.
>
> -- Pete
>
> --
> docs mailing list
> docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/docs@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
docs mailing list
docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/docs@lists.fedoraproject.org