DragonFly docs List (threaded) for 2004-11
Re: Wiki-fying docs
I think I have to agree with Hiten. I like the collaborative nature
of Wiki and I could see us generating a Wiki compatible set of
documents for the purpose of public comment, and use that to generate
patches back into the official document format. But I don't think we
can use Wiki as a basis for the documentation... it doesn't have a
formal enough infrastructure to serve as a good basis.
If someone wants to write a Wiki-generator from the documentation and
a patch generator to deal with changes (not for the purpose of
attempting to auto-patch back into the original infrastructure, since
that would be impossible, but for review and reintegration purposes)...
that would be pretty cool.
:Justin C. Sherrill wrote:
:> I've noticed that there's been a number of people who have wanted to
:> contribute to docs, but the process of installing the doc-proj port and
:> all its dependencies, plus talking SGML, plus building it, is forming a
:> sort of barrier to entry. I think I'm the only poor soul that's done it.
:> I was thinking we could copy the existing docs into a Wiki, and see how
:> contributions change from there. Mashing wiki changes back into CVS may
:> be less laborious than putting other people through the docproj wringer.
:> Can anyone think of any objections?
: Let's not use Wiki for professional project documentation.
: Sure, use it as a staging area, but not for the final thing.