On Vi, 18 iun 21, 17:40:34, Michael Grant wrote: > > It's a little odd for Debian to host a documentation wiki for upstream > tools. The package maintainers would need to look after the wiki page > that corresponds to the package they are maintaining. Not everyone is > going to be happy with more work. Even if they are not the ones > writing it, they will need to be aware of it and if things change, > tweak it. Agreed. > It feels like you should try to start a sort of "unixepedia" thing > like wikipedia and then one by one try to get people to create pages > for their tools. Then, eventually people will put links into their > man pages pointing at this global resource. That's my best opinion > after reading all your posts. Agreed, except for the "get people to create pages for their tools". The upstream maintainers have enough work actually developing the software. I'm fairly certain the Arch wiki (praised here again and again) is written by the users. The Arch wiki is GFDL 1.3 (or later), so the initial content could just be copied from there (with appropriate attribution and whatever else the license requires, of course), with small tweaks to remove the Arch-specific parts. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature