Re: what needs doing?
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 09:37:52AM +0000, Martin WHEELER wrote:
> Has anyone ever suggested we use a WikiWikiWeb (qv) for this purpose?
I hope not.
> At least in the initial stages, as a fast and dirty prototyping method?
> Get out a very quick rough draft, then go on to the "conventional" methods?
I wouldn't imagine that Wiki was suitable for this. What you really
need is something more structured, IMHO. For instance, a database which
contained the following:
parent_task (zero if top level)
degree of completion
Task/package table (links documentation tasks with packages)
Work table (this shows who's working on what)
... then a bunch of forms and queries to manipulate and view the data.
This would let us do such things as "What important pieces of
documentation are not currently being worked on by anyone?" or "who can
I talk to about this piece of documentation?" or "what documentation
tasks are outstanding for these packages?"
I could do a first cut of this in an afternoon in Perl/MySQL. Using
PostgreSQL (which I'd have to learn first), call it 2 days. I do this
stuff in my sleep, actually... so if there's some kind of consensus that
people want it done, let me know and I'll do it.
> If not, I suggest the LDP looks at setting up something like TWiki (see
> sourceforge), where we can all drop in and add our two-penn'orth online,
> to whatever document we feel like commenting on or violently amending at
> the time.
Commenting/annotation is a very different beast to project management.
Sure, you could (and probably should) set up the above to allow
comments, but a freeform comment system doesn't help any in knowing
*what needs doing* unless you have some serious AI search tools :)
Kirrily Robert -- <firstname.lastname@example.org> -- http://netizen.com.au/
Internet and Open Source Development, Consulting and Training
Level 13, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax +61 3 9614 0948