On 07/16/2018 01:48 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 07/16/2018 01:39 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>>
>> Not sure this is much different from the Wiki unless:
>
> The wiki is certainly "a place" that can be used for this but the wiki
> takes a lot of effort to find things on it, manage it etc...
>
>> Who is going to?:
>>
>> 1) Run/maintain it.
>>
>
> Well this is a community. The hope would be that the community would
> step up. As a proposer (and writer) I am certainly willing to participate.
In theory a nice idea, but community encompasses everybody and when it
comes to organization everybody = nobody. Without some sort of editorial
board running this then we are back to the Wiki.
>
>
>> 2) Get people to contribute.
>
> I don't think this is nearly as difficult except if we create artificial
> barriers to contribution (writing in the wiki is a highly subpar
> experience).
Not difficult, but folks will write about what they are interested in
which is not necessarily what users are looking for.
>
>>
>> 3) Edit new content, clean up old content
>>
>
> So some of this could be original content, some of it could just be
> links to various blogs/articles that already exist and some could be
> maintenance. However, I see maintenance as a secondary issue because we
> would publish based on version. If someone wrote an article for 9.6 it
> may or may not apply for 11 but that doesn't matter. People are always
> generating new content.
Actually I see maintenance as a big if not the primary issue. The only
thing worse then no docs are docs that are not vetted/maintained. The
list is full of posts from folks that got information from dubious
sources and did things in error. If this project is to be useful then
the quality of the information should match that of the official
documentation and that is a high standard.
>
> JD
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> JD
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com