+1 Steven
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Ned Bass <ba...@llnl.gov> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:48:35AM -0800, Nathan Rutman wrote: >> Would it be easier to move the manual back to a Wiki? The low hassle >> factor of wikis has always been a draw for contribution. The openSFS >> site is up and running with MediaWiki now (wiki.opensfs.org). > > Easier? Yes, probably. Better? I personally don't think so. Wikis are > great collaboration tools for informally sharing information, but I > don't think the paradigm scales well for documents of this size and > complexity. And a wiki isn't the right tool for producing a formal > professional-quality document, which is what I think the Lustre manual > should strive to be. > > True, we would lower the bar for contributions, but for that we would > sacrifice the following features that I consider essential. > > - Ability to export to multiple formats (pdf, html, epub) from one source > - Consistency of formatting and navigation elements > - A review process for proposed changes that assures a high standard of > quality > > However, there are some short articles that probably do belong in the > wiki that could be poached from the manual, i.e. installation and > configuration procedures, etc. > > Ned _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss