I don't have anything against wikis - they're great for information that changes more frequently than releases are made and should be user-facing (configuration, FAQs, etc).
For large technical changes, like the one currently being propsosed, the PDF isn't static, but will have several versions posted. The whole discussion is: PDF version 0, then comments on that PDF, then PDFv1, then more discussions until eventually the discussion turns into +1s and the final version of the PDF is attached. The JIRA does a good job of chronicling the discussion that wiki change logs doesn't. JIRA just seems like a more natural forum to spur discussion. Also, having the person driving the change updating the document tends to keep the discussion on track and making progress. Finally, new or less senior members of the community may be reluctant to edit a semi-official project document like a wiki, but hopefully will be willing to join in the discussion on JIRA. -jg On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jul 20, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Jakob Homan wrote: > >>>> and then just comment and iterate over there. Is that not the preferred >>>> way? >>> >>> No, that's very bad. There's no way that others can participate and modify >>> the design. >>> >> >> How so? The documentation is online and the discussion is online and >> recorded for posterity. The only barrier to entry to the discussion is >> setting up a JIRA account. > > The design document should be open to the community to edit. Not a frozen > PDF document. I'll turn the question around. What problem do you see > storing the document in a wiki format? > > > Regards, > Alan > >
