FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Documentation

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-12-2008, 02:25 PM
Jeremy McSpadden
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

On Wed, 2008-11-12 at 16:14 +0100, Ben de Groot wrote:


Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Втр, 11/11/2008 в 17:08 +0000, Duncan пишет:
>> Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> posted 491988F5.9010206@gentoo.org,
>> excerpted below, on Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:30:29 +0100:
>>> Josh Saddler wrote:
>>>> Nope. The gentoo-wiki.com owner has already stated on the forums that
>>>> he doesn't see a need for it to be hosted on our infrastructure.
>>> Did he do that after the recent debacle? I think he would be more
>>> interested now. (Yes, people can change their mind...)
>> I'm wondering on that too. Events sometimes have a way of changing
>> someone's mind, and if that could happen, I'd think it would have at this.
>
> This was after. I've tried to contact him too and afaik there was an
> official proposal at the same time with similar results.

And why was that not made public? This is the first I hear about that.





I've spoken to the infra team about hosting. We're not up for jumping through loops and hoops just to get the project hosted. Mike (thrasher7) agree's on keeping the wiki 'a community' project. By hosting with the infra team, that just means we have to follow their guidelines. ie. code audits, reporting to other devs, lack of physical access to machines as well as root access, etc.



The gentoo-portage code would be a nice addition as an official site. The current packages.gentoo.org site, as we can all agree; is nothing compared to g-p.com.*








Jeremy McSpadden

jeremy@gentoo-wiki.com

Gentoo-Wiki/Portage

Systems Administrator
 
Old 11-12-2008, 02:55 PM
Jan Kundrt
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

Jeremy McSpadden wrote:
I've spoken to the infra team about hosting. We're not up for jumping
through loops and hoops just to get the project hosted. Mike (thrasher7)
agree's on keeping the wiki 'a community' project. By hosting with the
infra team, that just means we have to follow their guidelines. ie. code
audits, reporting to other devs, lack of physical access to machines as
well as root access, etc.


Could we get this posted on gentoo-wiki.com as an article of some kind?
I for one wasn't aware of *any* communication going between us (Gentoo)
and you (gentoo-wiki/portage).


I think that putting this disclaimer to both portals would be really
great and prevent much confusion and useless emails.


The gentoo-portage code would be a nice addition as an official site.
The current packages.gentoo.org site, as we can all agree; is nothing
compared to g-p.com.


Please talk to our infrastructure team, and please remove me from your
list of "all" .


Cheers,
-jkt

--
cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth
 
Old 11-12-2008, 03:29 PM
Jose Luis Rivero
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

Josh Saddler wrote:

Hey again. So there's some discussion (again) on starting up an official
Gentoo wiki. Official meaning it's hosted on our infrastructure; e.g.
wiki.gentoo.org. This time the discussion is coming from our fellow
developers and infra overlords.



Our fellow developers or infra overlords have seen any problem in how do
we work and the status of the current documentation? This list is open
to anyone and I haven't read any mail saying so.




However, it's been quite awhile since the last time we (the GDP) talked
it over. Given our current issues of manpower and time (see
archives.gentoo.org for commit totals), perhaps a wiki could solve some
issues?


Let's face what problems we have in GDP and find a way to solve them.
The solution should not bring new problems or make our most powerful
features worst.



The classic problems are:
1) Who has access
2) Who reports faulty articles
3) Who fixes them
4) Who verifies the article is correct
5) ???
6) Profit


These problems appear when you are going against wiki principles, may be
are you trying to use a wiki for something which was not designed to?



So, I'd like to hear what you think. Should we have a wiki? Why or why
not?


What will be the propose of the wiki? More documentation? Written by
anyone and hosted in gentoo.org? Without being sure about its quality
first? If so, you have my "no, please".



There's no question that having a properly-administered wiki can be a
powerful asset. Look at Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, the Xfce wiki, etc. What
about Gentoo?


Maybe I'm too ignorant but every time a look to Ubuntu or Debian wiki I
wasn't able to be sure about the 'official','review','updated' state of
the documentation.


Summarizing:

- If you think we have problems in GDP, let's talk about them.
- Seems to me that people is thinking of using a wiki not as a result
of a process to solve a problem.
- I prefer quality over quantity. Every step done shouldn't touch the
Gentoo Documentation quality.
- If someone is thinking of us involved in the wiki review or admin
process and all its fun, please ask first.
- If someone is thinking of replacing docs with a wiki, I really
dislike the idea.

Thanks.

--
Jose Luis Rivero <yoswink@gentoo.org>
Gentoo/Alpha Gentoo/Doc
 
Old 11-12-2008, 05:09 PM
Peter Volkov
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

В Срд, 12/11/2008 в 16:14 +0100, Ben de Groot пишет:
> Peter Volkov wrote:
> > В Втр, 11/11/2008 в 17:08 +0000, Duncan пишет:
> >> Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> posted 491988F5.9010206@gentoo.org,
> >> excerpted below, on Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:30:29 +0100:
> >>> Josh Saddler wrote:
> >>>> Nope. The gentoo-wiki.com owner has already stated on the forums that
> >>>> he doesn't see a need for it to be hosted on our infrastructure.
> >>> Did he do that after the recent debacle? I think he would be more
> >>> interested now. (Yes, people can change their mind...)
> >> I'm wondering on that too. Events sometimes have a way of changing
> >> someone's mind, and if that could happen, I'd think it would have at this.
> >
> > This was after. I've tried to contact him too and afaik there was an
> > official proposal at the same time with similar results.
>
> And why was that not made public? This is the first I hear about that.

Until there existed context, like this discussion, I don't see where I
could fit this information. And I didn't want to start discussion about
wiki by myself. But since it's started see the facts.

--
Peter.
 
Old 11-18-2008, 12:48 AM
wireless
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

Jose Luis Rivero wrote:

>> So, I'd like to hear what you think. Should we have a wiki? Why or why
>> not?

NO !!!

> What will be the propose of the wiki? More documentation? Written by
> anyone and hosted in gentoo.org? Without being sure about its quality
> first? If so, you have my "no, please".

>> There's no question that having a properly-administered wiki can be a
>> powerful asset. Look at Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, the Xfce wiki, etc. What
>> about Gentoo?

> Maybe I'm too ignorant but every time a look to Ubuntu or Debian wiki I
> wasn't able to be sure about the 'official','review','updated' state of
> the documentation.

> Summarizing:
> - If you think we have problems in GDP, let's talk about them.
> - Seems to me that people is thinking of using a wiki not as a result
> of a process to solve a problem.
> - I prefer quality over quantity. Every step done shouldn't touch the
> Gentoo Documentation quality.
> - If someone is thinking of us involved in the wiki review or admin
> process and all its fun, please ask first.
> - If someone is thinking of replacing docs with a wiki, I really
> dislike the idea.

Sorry for the delayed response, I've been unplugged for a while.....


After reading the entire thread, a rather simple solution seems
obvious. The GDP or Infra or whatever official group should stay
out of the the wiki business, for many aforementioned reasons.


However, if what ever the new wiki(s) pop up for the ashes of any
previous efforts, it seem like a natural place for 'official gentoo
folks' to peruse, parse, filter and/or glean information for good
ideas and (tested) content into one of the existing gentoo
semantics (GDP infra whatever), but leave the morass of a wiki to
the user community at large.

That way folks could first look to the trunk of Gentoo for docs
on a given subject and if nothing there exist, THEN go to any
of these community wikis.


For example, installing a webcam is pretty important and very, very
common among needs for any distro. Yet if you google for webcam,
install and gentoo, you get a variety of 'hash' mostly outdated.


Those talent folks within the official gentoo structure, should
recognize this and build docs somewhere, of high quality, that
walk a gentoo user through how to set up a capture card (ntsc/pal)
or a web cam.

But for every issue that really needs a good doc, there will be
many wikis with a variety of quality, mostly due to the lack of
maintenance over time. Smart folks with lots of current
responsibilities, should stay focused on current goals.


However, as the external gentoo wikis mature, but the others
in the gentoo community, folks can glean good idea to increase
the officially maintained docs.

YMMV,

James
 
Old 11-18-2008, 09:19 AM
AllenJB
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

Request for clarification:
So you're proposing that if I write a good article on the wiki, the
Gentoo devs should take that article, XMLify it and put it on the static
site where I can't update it easily?


AllenJB

wireless wrote:

Jose Luis Rivero wrote:


So, I'd like to hear what you think. Should we have a wiki? Why or why
not?


NO !!!


What will be the propose of the wiki? More documentation? Written by
anyone and hosted in gentoo.org? Without being sure about its quality
first? If so, you have my "no, please".



There's no question that having a properly-administered wiki can be a
powerful asset. Look at Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, the Xfce wiki, etc. What
about Gentoo?



Maybe I'm too ignorant but every time a look to Ubuntu or Debian wiki I
wasn't able to be sure about the 'official','review','updated' state of
the documentation.


Summarizing:
- If you think we have problems in GDP, let's talk about them.

- Seems to me that people is thinking of using a wiki not as a result
of a process to solve a problem.
- I prefer quality over quantity. Every step done shouldn't touch the
Gentoo Documentation quality.
- If someone is thinking of us involved in the wiki review or admin
process and all its fun, please ask first.
- If someone is thinking of replacing docs with a wiki, I really
dislike the idea.


Sorry for the delayed response, I've been unplugged for a while.....


After reading the entire thread, a rather simple solution seems
obvious. The GDP or Infra or whatever official group should stay
out of the the wiki business, for many aforementioned reasons.


However, if what ever the new wiki(s) pop up for the ashes of any
previous efforts, it seem like a natural place for 'official gentoo
folks' to peruse, parse, filter and/or glean information for good
ideas and (tested) content into one of the existing gentoo
semantics (GDP infra whatever), but leave the morass of a wiki to
the user community at large.

That way folks could first look to the trunk of Gentoo for docs
on a given subject and if nothing there exist, THEN go to any
of these community wikis.


For example, installing a webcam is pretty important and very, very
common among needs for any distro. Yet if you google for webcam,
install and gentoo, you get a variety of 'hash' mostly outdated.


Those talent folks within the official gentoo structure, should
recognize this and build docs somewhere, of high quality, that
walk a gentoo user through how to set up a capture card (ntsc/pal)
or a web cam.

But for every issue that really needs a good doc, there will be
many wikis with a variety of quality, mostly due to the lack of
maintenance over time. Smart folks with lots of current
responsibilities, should stay focused on current goals.


However, as the external gentoo wikis mature, but the others
in the gentoo community, folks can glean good idea to increase
the officially maintained docs.

YMMV,

James
 
Old 11-18-2008, 10:03 AM
Josh Saddler
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

AllenJB wrote:
> Request for clarification:
> So you're proposing that if I write a good article on the wiki, the
> Gentoo devs should take that article, XMLify it and put it on the static
> site where I can't update it easily?

Actually, I'm not sure that guy had anything to say, really. But yeah,
you're right; basically, it's a bad idea. If you write the article, best
to keep it someplace where you know it'll easily receive TLC.
 
Old 11-18-2008, 04:09 PM
wireless
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

Josh Saddler wrote:

AllenJB wrote:

Request for clarification:
So you're proposing that if I write a good article on the wiki, the
Gentoo devs should take that article, XMLify it and put it on the static
site where I can't update it easily?


Your docs on your wiki, should follow whatever semantic you like.
Nobody is talking about hi-jacking your (wiki) docs. I'm talking about

maybe one out of fifty docs that one typically finds on a wiki, could
be motivation (and yes some ideas) on creating a similar doc that
is officially bless and maintained, to a much higher standard and
address things such that they can influence some of the existing
official docs.


Actually, I'm not sure that guy had anything to say, really. But yeah,
you're right; basically, it's a bad idea. If you write the article, best
to keep it someplace where you know it'll easily receive TLC.



Um, I think your both confused what I'm trying to say. I'll restate
it, hopefully a little bit more clearly.


Running a wiki, which usually has many folks actively involved, where
the emphasis is on quantity of docs, not rigid uniformity, and where
the particular selection of docs will usually be vastly larger than
any official distro docs, you have completely different semantics, so
they cannot be merged, without great pain, compromise and huge amounts

of time.


Let the wiki, (or any number of wikis) exist unto themselves. However,
if a really good topic comes up, then those officially under much
tighter constraints, such as GDP or infra, should consider maintaining

a similar doc, that is held to much tighter (semantics) controls.


Let's face it. We all re-hash much of the same content on different
linux distros, or even the same linux distro, so *I* do not see any
big deal with this concept. Google for something and often you find
multiple wikis that address a given subject with different docs, but
with much that is common. Occasionally one will see a reference to
that original doc that inspired the derivative. Often the wiki docs
are old and not maintained, for a variety of reason. Just google for
how to install a camera on a linux machine for a myriad of ideas. It
sure would be nice to have an officially maintain basic video setup on
gentoo, either using capture cards or a cheap webcam, as a baseline
for folks to get something working. (using my previous example). It
would not have to be encompassing but it should be maintained to GDP

or such standards. Then let the wiki document, via dozens of different
documents, many of the finer, fast moving aspects of cameras and
video. I.E. *Complimentary documents* not competing documents....




Two docs that address the same subject, one on a wiki, the other part
of the official gentoo docs is good for users. The official docs will
never be as numerous as other docs folks use to solve a problem or at

least get some ideas how to install or fix something. However what is
part of the official docs should be rigorously maintained, and held to
a much higher standard, than the typical wiki, imho.



There is a reason we have many motorcycles and many vehicles with 4
wheels. However, how often do you see a three-wheeled vehicle? Sure
they exist, but, they are not common and they are very easily wrecked.
Remember the early ones for recreational vehicles in the 1980s? They
have been baned here in the US, because they were prone to
catastrophic failure. Ditto for merging a wiki and official distro docs.




ymmv,
James
 
Old 11-18-2008, 04:26 PM
AllenJB
 
Default Wiki, Take #whatever

wireless wrote:

Josh Saddler wrote:

AllenJB wrote:

Request for clarification:
So you're proposing that if I write a good article on the wiki, the
Gentoo devs should take that article, XMLify it and put it on the static
site where I can't update it easily?


Your docs on your wiki, should follow whatever semantic you like. Nobody
is talking about hi-jacking your (wiki) docs. I'm talking about

maybe one out of fifty docs that one typically finds on a wiki, could
be motivation (and yes some ideas) on creating a similar doc that
is officially bless and maintained, to a much higher standard and
address things such that they can influence some of the existing
official docs.


If there's already a high quality document on the wiki, why is there a
need to duplicate efforts? Surely it's the areas NOT already covered by
high quality documentation that should be concentrated on.





Actually, I'm not sure that guy had anything to say, really. But yeah,
you're right; basically, it's a bad idea. If you write the article, best
to keep it someplace where you know it'll easily receive TLC.



Um, I think your both confused what I'm trying to say. I'll restate it,
hopefully a little bit more clearly.


Running a wiki, which usually has many folks actively involved, where
the emphasis is on quantity of docs, not rigid uniformity, and where the
particular selection of docs will usually be vastly larger than any
official distro docs, you have completely different semantics, so they
cannot be merged, without great pain, compromise and huge amounts

of time.


Let the wiki, (or any number of wikis) exist unto themselves. However,
if a really good topic comes up, then those officially under much
tighter constraints, such as GDP or infra, should consider maintaining

a similar doc, that is held to much tighter (semantics) controls.


Again, you're suggesting duplication of efforts. What point would this
have? What problem would it fix?


Let's face it. We all re-hash much of the same content on different
linux distros, or even the same linux distro, so *I* do not see any big
deal with this concept. Google for something and often you find multiple
wikis that address a given subject with different docs, but with much
that is common. Occasionally one will see a reference to that original
doc that inspired the derivative. Often the wiki docs are old and not
maintained, for a variety of reason.


While this was true of the old wiki, it is certainly not true of the
documents on the new Gentoo Wiki - they are being checked for accuracy
and errors by a team of volunteers as they are being entered. We will be
doing our best to keep it this way.


We're also already considering methods of indicating documents which we
believe to be particularly good or particularly bad.



Just google for how to install a
camera on a linux machine for a myriad of ideas. It sure would be nice
to have an officially maintain basic video setup on gentoo, either using
capture cards or a cheap webcam, as a baseline
for folks to get something working. (using my previous example). It
would not have to be encompassing but it should be maintained to GDP

or such standards. Then let the wiki document, via dozens of different
documents, many of the finer, fast moving aspects of cameras and video.
I.E. *Complimentary documents* not competing documents....


Why can't, where they exist, the wiki document both? You're not going to
be able to stop people documenting certain things on the wiki (and as an
admin of the wiki, I don't believe you'd want to).




Two docs that address the same subject, one on a wiki, the other part of
the official gentoo docs is good for users.

How is it good for users? Now they have to judge which document to follow.


The official docs will never
be as numerous as other docs folks use to solve a problem or at
least get some ideas how to install or fix something. However what is
part of the official docs should be rigorously maintained, and held to a
much higher standard, than the typical wiki, imho.


There is a reason we have many motorcycles and many vehicles with 4
wheels. However, how often do you see a three-wheeled vehicle? Sure they
exist, but, they are not common and they are very easily wrecked.
Remember the early ones for recreational vehicles in the 1980s? They
have been baned here in the US, because they were prone to catastrophic
failure. Ditto for merging a wiki and official distro docs.


I don't see what this analogy has to do with this discussion at all. It
seems to be totally unrelated to me.




ymmv,
James



In my opinion, the Gentoo Documentation Project is there to maintain
documentation on issues specifically related to Gentoo and issues which
you'd expect to find official documents on. Things like upgrading to
baselayout 2 or upgrading to a newer profile.


Meanwhile the wiki is there to basically document everything else. How
to install and configure software or hardware (perhaps in a specific way).


There will always be some crossover, but that's the main "areas of
responsibility" that I see each covering.


AllenJB
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:01 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org