Am Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:25:52 -0700 schrieb Kay Schenk <[email protected]>: > I too have noticed the differences in the main site and wiki...what a > confusing mess to say the least. And, it seems in some cases, neither > areas are completely accurate or up to date -- even more maddening! I > experienced this very thing when trying to track down current > information on CVS usage yesterday. It's important from my standpoint > to keep the main site pages because this is where prospective members > can join, view mailing lists etc. I feel the main site vs the wiki > for a given area can, and probably should, reflect different types of > information, but, yes, by all means they should be kept in sync. I guess, we just do not have the resources to keep all that up to date. Esp. some generic topics like "development" are left out (while specific topics are better maintained, as the responsibilities are clearer). So my point is: if we cannot keep wiki and website in sync, we should use either use the wiki or the website. For the topics of contributing.openoffice.org I think it is pretty clear, that the wiki is easier to maintain (and is de facto better maintained).
Also as "contributing" is the entrypoint to the project, the wiki is a better point to get involved, as most active communication is via mailing lists, issue tracker, wiki and IRC, but not via static webpages. > project managers are the appropriate contacts for dealing with this. Well, the writer project already took that step: http://sw.openoffice.org/ but I am more concerned about the "generic contributing entrypoint" which does not clearly map to one project ... YMMV. Best Regards, Bjoern --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
