Josh Saddler wrote: > It takes time and effort to produce one of our polished, professional > documents. That's duplicating the time and effort that it takes to write > a decent wiki article -- pointless duplication. > > One of the things I'm hearing from just about every other user and > developer is that users would be providing the peer review necessary to > keep documents at a general level of quality. This means "let the wiki > live its wiki life," which means there's no need to reformat the article > as something else. If it's a decent wiki article, then it should stand > on its own merits....as a wiki article, nothing else. It's a community > contributed article on the community-contributed resource. That's where > it belongs. > > Most folks have said they're okay with official Gentoo documentation and > a second community-contributed resource (that may not be as accurate, > tested, readable, etc.) So keep that system around. If you want to jot > up a quick howto, or an article filled with individual speculation and > anecdotes, keep it on the wiki. If you want a doc to be considered *the* > authority on its subject (such as > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xfce-config.xml ;)), maintained by Gentoo > developers, then submit it to the GDP via bugzilla, or provide updates > to one of the docs we already have. > > There really is no reason why we can't have this split. There's no need > to XMLify every halfway decent wiki article just because it's so much > better than everything else on the wiki. Trying to do so involves an > inordinate number of work hours and staff that we just don't have, not > to mention greatly raising the existing maintainer burden.
++ Good plan. -Joe