On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Daniel Erez <derez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Roy Golan <rgolan(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> I'm getting the feeling I'm not alone in this, authoring and publishing a
> wiki page isn't as used to be for long time.
> I want to suggest a bit lighter workflow:
> 1. Everyone can merge their page - (it's a wiki)
> Same as with (public and open) code, no one has the motivation to
> publish a badly written
> wiki page under their name. True, it can have an impact, but not as
> with broken code
Moreover, I think we shouldn't block any merging. Instead, wiki
maintainers could act afterwards and revert when needed (Wikipedia style).
Another issue is that (sadly) unlike mediawiki, we need to wait for wiki
publish after a change. So I'd suggest to build and publish the wiki at
least once a day. Any way, I think we should make the workflow much more
intuitive and pleasant like the previous wiki - i.e. much less restrictive
than manipulating a code base.
> 2. Use Page-Status marker
> The author first merges the draft. Its now out there and should be
> updated as time goes and its
> status is DRAFT. Maintainers will come later and after review would
> change the status to
> PUBLISH. That could be a header in on the page:
> page status: DRAFT/PUBLISH
> Simple I think, and should work.
The effort of maintaining the wiki today compare to how it used to be
before is much more cumbersome and problematic.
I think we can learn a lot from wikipedia workflow,
It is a much more inviting process where anyone can change the content
I'm not saying we should let any anonymous user change the wiki but even if
we make it easier in house we can achieve much more informative reliable
and updated wiki.
> Devel mailing list
Users mailing list