On Mi, 22 apr 20, 17:44:00, David Wright wrote: > On Tue 21 Apr 2020 at 20:07:55 (+0100), Brian wrote: > > > > At the same time, what is the point of discusssion? A user thinks a > > technical point on the wiki is wrong; they know it is wrong; they change > > it. Where's the problem? > > 1. Going from thinking to knowing. Even assuming they're well-informed, > it may be worth checking with other people running different systems > about what's wrong, and what the new text should say. The best thing about a wiki is that anyone can edit it[1]. Having to check with others first would, in my opinion, just hinder contributions. Reverts are much easier to do than edits ;) > 2. Pages often need more than just piecemeal corrections: they may > need someone with a sense of ownership to restructure them, or even > to coordinate a rewrite when they lose focus. This looks very much like "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"[2] models. In my opinion a wiki is much better suited for the bazaar model, the cathedral model you seem to be advocating is better suited for more formal documents (Debian Policy, Installation Guide, Release Notes, etc.). Reminder: development of all Debian manuals is open, anyone is free to report bugs and/or provide suggestions, preferably as patches. [1] Unfortunately this can also mean that nobody is actually editing it. [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature