-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/16/2015 11:33 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:> My only question is, how do we determine what goes in the wiki vs > what goes in git? The flow/format between the two is a bit > different. Or is this development the first step in the transition > away from the wiki to another medium?That's a good question, and I don't have it answered. :) It has to do with our intention/thinking as a group. I don't see a reason to move away from the wiki as a contributor-focused area, for example. It self-organizes fairly well, and when people need to write something easily-enough at a centos.org domain it lets folks do that fairly well. But I'm picking a fairly-small focus area (docs for contributors), as we'll have to add people to the wiki, curate the content a bit, etc. This is why I'm thinking the short-form how-to-do-stuff-on-CentOS is a chance to break away from the wiki with a new, lower-barriers toolset and process without having to deal with "should we wiki or should we not?" - - Karsten - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade .^\ CentOS Doer of Stuff http://TheOpenSourceWay.org \ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlUHMq8ACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEFVLQCgxmiVkcnoBLfF59UTDkwIeGX3 nxEAoMuNEdj/piEQ8VmSO6smbFNHUNYF =6zZE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----- Original Message -----> From: "Karsten Wade" <kwade at redhat.com> > To: centos-docs at centos.org > Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 12:44:47 PM > Subject: Re: [CentOS-docs] Docs strategy and tactics [RFC] > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 03/16/2015 11:33 AM, Jim Perrin wrote: > > My only question is, how do we determine what goes in the wiki vs > > what goes in git? The flow/format between the two is a bit > > different. Or is this development the first step in the transition > > away from the wiki to another medium? > > That's a good question, and I don't have it answered. :) It has to do > with our intention/thinking as a group. > > I don't see a reason to move away from the wiki as a > contributor-focused area, for example. It self-organizes fairly well, > and when people need to write something easily-enough at a centos.org > domain it lets folks do that fairly well. But I'm picking a > fairly-small focus area (docs for contributors), as we'll have to add > people to the wiki, curate the content a bit, etc. > > This is why I'm thinking the short-form how-to-do-stuff-on-CentOS is a > chance to break away from the wiki with a new, lower-barriers toolset > and process without having to deal with "should we wiki or should we not?"If there's some overlap between git and wiki, it'll give us a chance to see which works better. I much prefer git to wiki personally. The wiki is fine if it's clear who "owns" a page, but when it comes to collaboration, I don't think the wiki stands up. Forking and pull requests are very freeing, and the wiki provides for neither. Maybe I'm not aware of the places where the centos wiki is really rocking, docswise. Jason> > - - Karsten > - -- > Karsten 'quaid' Wade .^\ CentOS Doer of Stuff > http://TheOpenSourceWay.org \ http://community.redhat.com > @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > > iEYEARECAAYFAlUHMq8ACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEFVLQCgxmiVkcnoBLfF59UTDkwIeGX3 > nxEAoMuNEdj/piEQ8VmSO6smbFNHUNYF > =6zZE > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-docs mailing list > CentOS-docs at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs >
Hi, On 03/16/2015 03:44 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:> On 03/16/2015 11:33 AM, Jim Perrin wrote: >> My only question is, how do we determine what goes in the wiki vs >> what goes in git? The flow/format between the two is a bit >> different. Or is this development the first step in the transition >> away from the wiki to another medium? > > That's a good question, and I don't have it answered. :) It has to do > with our intention/thinking as a group.Providing feedback from another project where the website is backed by Git, and the workflow for user contributions is documented http://manageiq.org At the foot of every page is a link "Edit this page on github" (eg: http://manageiq.org/documentation/ ). It's been a while since I looked, but my experience was that there were very few clicks through to edit and PRs. Anecdotally, people didn't realise they could propose edits this way. Prominent wiki-like controls are important to getting drive-by edits, and I am personally a fan of the in-place editing experience you get from a good wiki. Thanks, Dave. -- Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338
----- Original Message -----> From: "Dave Neary" <dneary at redhat.com> > To: "Mail list for wiki articles" <centos-docs at centos.org> > Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 1:42:06 PM > Subject: Re: [CentOS-docs] Docs strategy and tactics [RFC] > > Hi, > > On 03/16/2015 03:44 PM, Karsten Wade wrote: > > On 03/16/2015 11:33 AM, Jim Perrin wrote: > >> My only question is, how do we determine what goes in the wiki vs > >> what goes in git? The flow/format between the two is a bit > >> different. Or is this development the first step in the transition > >> away from the wiki to another medium? > > > > That's a good question, and I don't have it answered. :) It has to do > > with our intention/thinking as a group. > > Providing feedback from another project where the website is backed by > Git, and the workflow for user contributions is documented > http://manageiq.org > > At the foot of every page is a link "Edit this page on github" (eg: > http://manageiq.org/documentation/ ). > > It's been a while since I looked, but my experience was that there were > very few clicks through to edit and PRs. Anecdotally, people didn't > realise they could propose edits this way. > > Prominent wiki-like controls are important to getting drive-by edits, > and I am personally a fan of the in-place editing experience you get > from a good wiki.Good info. Different strokes, etc., only way to judge is through results. Wikis are certainly a well-known sort of tool, if ppl don't realize they can make a change, they definitely won't.> > Thanks, > Dave. > > -- > Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy > Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com > Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338 > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-docs mailing list > CentOS-docs at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs >
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/16/2015 01:42 PM, Dave Neary wrote:> Prominent wiki-like controls are important to getting drive-by > edits, and I am personally a fan of the in-place editing experience > you get from a good wiki.I wonder if we can find a way to make the "Edit this page on GitHub" more obvious then? Because I agree, the [edit] link on WikiMedia sites (for example) is a clear invitation. (And I know anonymous edits are a pathway to deep frustration, lowering barriers for some while making others' lives overwhelming ... but the clear invitation is a UX piece we can keep.) - - Karsten - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade .^\ CentOS Doer of Stuff http://TheOpenSourceWay.org \ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlUHelgACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEGJgQCdFvC130O52nOJ8DF3bao/CkFJ 3OsAniw/XfI7I/bnyhRTPCcicKyIkZE8 =qU0s -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----