Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
As far as reviewing/applying/approving patches for wwwdocs is concerned,
and implementing suggestions sent to the GCC lists, I'm committed to do
that, and do so within one "online day" if possible in any way.
I'd like to applaud you for that effort.
However, I just don't have the bandwidth to dig through Wiki and port
things over, and it's not exactly an efficient nor motivating modus
operandi either.
What about considering the wiki as documentation in progress? Once the
author(s) is satisfied with the work it could be submitted for review
and inclusion in the official docs. I think someone even mentioned
hacking up a wikisyntax to texi converter a while back that could make
this more streamlined.
instead of saying what seems to be "we shouldn't let people write
about this stuff on the wiki".
Really, it depends on what "this stuff" is. Duplicating official
information from the regular web pages simply does not seem very
fruitful (and risks inconsistencies), and taking a wwwdocs patch
and putting it into the Wiki as Michael did as opposed to providing
feeback just seems counter productive.
Providing feedback takes time and requires follow-up. Hitting edit on a
wiki page gets it done /now/ and out of the way. It may not be the most
logical or correct way to do things, but it's more comfortable and
suited to how people write (docs or otherwise). The easier it is for
people to write documentation, the better quality documentation they'll
write.
One other point: it's far less nerve-wracking for someone new to the
project to add something to the wiki than go through the review process.
Yes, that might make little sense to experienced contributors. Yes,
it's still true. ;)
--de.
