12:14 p.m.
Does anyone have an opinion on moving the current Docs Project wiki
page to Category:Docs Project? It would allow a one stop shop,
basically, but I don't really see it as a need.
Thoughts?
--Eric
1:25 p.m.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Eric Christensen
<eric(a)christensenplace.us> wrote:
Does anyone have an opinion on moving the current Docs Project wiki
page to Category:Docs Project? It would allow a one stop shop,
basically, but I don't really see it as a need.
Thoughts?
At the moment I think there is too much stuff on Docs Project page to
just move it to the Category. If it gets trimmed down and sub
category names are obvious about where to get more information then
sure...
I am more interested in seeing the Category:Docs Project cleaned up -
and especially if that is the "main" entry point.
It currently has 133 pages in it (and 28 subcategories). I went
looking for the guides table so I could find a link to whatever I
reviewed for somebody and had to sift through a lot of noise. There
are a lot of pages that are in sub categories AND the main category
that I think should just be in a sub category - a few meeting related
items, several events and hackfest notes, a bunch of guide pages (or
draft guide pages), and mostly the RN beats...
I would also like to see a name change to RH Beats - I don't think it
encourages enough outside contribution. As I understand it the beats
name came when there are a writer patrolling and adding content for
that subject (beat). That was also a time when the content stayed in
the wiki until the final move to be packaged. Currently I think the
"beat writers" are writing in docbook directly and others can see that
with the regular draft builds and add to the notes with bug report,
email, or the wiki beats pages. So if the the wiki pages were RN
contributions or Release Notes Staging for <oldbeatname> it might be
easier for a new contributor to find a place to add a paragraph about
the new features of their favorite app or updated package submission.
Those are some of my thoughts...
-Susan
--
Susan Lauber, (RHCX, RHCA, RHCSS)
Lauber System Solutions, Inc.
http://www.laubersolutions.com
gpg: 15AC F794 A3D9 64D1 D9CE 4C26 EFC3 11C2 BFA1 0974
7:17 p.m.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 02:25:41PM -0500, Susan Lauber wrote:
At the moment I think there is too much stuff on Docs Project page
to
just move it to the Category. If it gets trimmed down and sub
category names are obvious about where to get more information then
sure...
I am more interested in seeing the Category:Docs Project cleaned up -
and especially if that is the "main" entry point.
It currently has 133 pages in it (and 28 subcategories). I went
looking for the guides table so I could find a link to whatever I
reviewed for somebody and had to sift through a lot of noise. There
are a lot of pages that are in sub categories AND the main category
that I think should just be in a sub category - a few meeting related
items, several events and hackfest notes, a bunch of guide pages (or
draft guide pages), and mostly the RN beats...
+1 from the wiki czar. If confusion will increase (from anybody), don't
do it.
--
Ian Weller <ian(a)ianweller.org>
"Why, a four-year-old could understand this report.
Find me a four-year-old child.
I can't make head or tail out of it." -- Groucho Marx, "Duck Soup"
10:25 p.m.
On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 19:17 -0600, Ian Weller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 02:25:41PM -0500, Susan Lauber wrote:
> At the moment I think there is too much stuff on Docs Project page to
> just move it to the Category. If it gets trimmed down and sub
> category names are obvious about where to get more information then
> sure...
>
> I am more interested in seeing the Category:Docs Project cleaned up -
> and especially if that is the "main" entry point.
> It currently has 133 pages in it (and 28 subcategories). I went
> looking for the guides table so I could find a link to whatever I
> reviewed for somebody and had to sift through a lot of noise. There
> are a lot of pages that are in sub categories AND the main category
> that I think should just be in a sub category - a few meeting related
> items, several events and hackfest notes, a bunch of guide pages (or
> draft guide pages), and mostly the RN beats...
>
+1 from the wiki czar. If confusion will increase (from anybody), don't
do it.
So we clearly have an organizational problem. I agree that there is way
too much stuff out there. From a management point of view I literally
live off of the "Docs Project meetings" page. I've almost made it a
dashboard of items that I need. So I don't actually sift through much
of the other noise that's out there. But if people can't find something
that is actually there then that's a problem.
If I were to clean up the Docs Project pages I'd want to go through the
Documentation category and clean it up/out. If information has been
moved to Docbook then it can be archived. Draft documentation needs to
be brought to light. New people want something to do, here's a great
chance to get involved. Docs Project category... what's even in there?
What do we really need in there? What's missing?
I know... more questions, not enough answers. If I can catch up on my
to do list I'll take a peek in there.
--Eric
6:57 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Christensen" <eric(a)christensenplace.us>
To: "For participants of the Documentation Project"
<fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: Moving Docs Project to Category:Docs Project
So I don't actually sift through much of the other noise
that's out
there. But if people can't find something that is actually there then
that's a problem.
We need to take a harder look at what we want to do. When we got rid of the
hierarchical naming so that "search could work", we changed "hard to
find"
into "impossible to find". And search is just as hopeless as it ever was.
Susan mentioned a hundred and some pages in the Docs_Project category. That
is a lot, but not totally unmanageable. Unfortunately, I suspect not all
relevant pages are in the category. And, really, there are enough pages in
the category that it is hard to find what you need.
We already have a lot of subcategories; probably too many. Unfortunately,
many pages, especially newer pages, aren't in the appropriate subcategory.
That failure makes the subcategories mostly useless since they become
repositories for documents you don't want to see, kind of like search.
If we had a SMALL number of relevant subcategories, our odds of getting a
page into the appropriate subcategory would increase. As it is we are lucky
to remember to put something into the project category. The odds of knowing
what the appropriate subcategory might be are vanishingly small.
On top of that, I'm afraid we need a more aggressive wiki gardening effort.
Just some thoughts
--McD
9:33 a.m.
On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 07:57 -0500, John J. McDonough wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Christensen" <eric(a)christensenplace.us>
To: "For participants of the Documentation Project"
<fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: Moving Docs Project to Category:Docs Project
> So I don't actually sift through much of the other noise that's out
> there. But if people can't find something that is actually there then
> that's a problem.
We need to take a harder look at what we want to do. When we got rid of the
hierarchical naming so that "search could work", we changed "hard to
find"
into "impossible to find". And search is just as hopeless as it ever was.
Susan mentioned a hundred and some pages in the Docs_Project category. That
is a lot, but not totally unmanageable. Unfortunately, I suspect not all
relevant pages are in the category. And, really, there are enough pages in
the category that it is hard to find what you need.
We already have a lot of subcategories; probably too many. Unfortunately,
many pages, especially newer pages, aren't in the appropriate subcategory.
That failure makes the subcategories mostly useless since they become
repositories for documents you don't want to see, kind of like search.
If we had a SMALL number of relevant subcategories, our odds of getting a
page into the appropriate subcategory would increase. As it is we are lucky
to remember to put something into the project category. The odds of knowing
what the appropriate subcategory might be are vanishingly small.
On top of that, I'm afraid we need a more aggressive wiki gardening effort.
Just some thoughts
--McD
Okay, so what categories do we need?
Docs Project
Documentation
Draft Documentation
Docs Project Management?
Docs Project SOP -> Docs Project Management
Docs Project archives -> Archives
Docs Project content tasks for experienced contributors
Docs Project content tasks for new contributors
Docs Project how to
Docs Project meeting logs REMOVE
Docs Project meetings
Docs Project policies -> Docs Project Management
Docs Project process -> ?
Docs Project roles -> ?
Docs Project tasks -> Docs Project ?
Docs Project tools -> Docs Project ?
Documentation CMS Option -> Archive
Documentation Guide -> Docs Project how to
Documentation beats
Documentation tools -> Docs Project tools
FDSCo -> ?
Improving the Docs Project workflow -> ?
Release Notes -> Draft Documentation
SELinux Docs -> Archive? (Check with Radsy)
Software Management Guide -> Archive?
User Guide -> Archive
Those are all the categories that are currently attached to Docs
Project. If we can move stuff around here it might help clear out some
of the noise. Maybe Ian can run Wikibot around to clean up this stuff,
too.
Some of these categories are empty, by the way.
--Eric
8:39 p.m.
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:33:38AM -0500, Eric Christensen wrote:
Maybe Ian can run Wikibot around to clean up this stuff,
too.
If it can be scripted, it can be done (usually).
--
Ian Weller <ian(a)ianweller.org>
"Why, a four-year-old could understand this report.
Find me a four-year-old child.
I can't make head or tail out of it." -- Groucho Marx, "Duck Soup"
10:41 p.m.
So we clearly have an organizational problem. I agree that there is
way
too much stuff out there. From a management point of view I literally
live off of the "Docs Project meetings" page. I've almost made it a
dashboard of items that I need. So I don't actually sift through much
of the other noise that's out there. But if people can't find something
that is actually there then that's a problem.
I'm curious whether this might actually be something that could be
tackled well in a sprint - not necessarily a full-blown FAD, but a few
hours during which a bunch of Docs folks run through through this online
and do enough cleanup that it's clear to any casual passerby what the
wiki should look like at 100% completion[1] and what remains to make it
look that way.
A contingent of
new-to-Docs-team-but-who-know-their-way-around-wiki-editing folks would
probably be helpful from a "let's check out what information's findable
and discoverable by people who don't already live in this section of the
wiki" perspective.
Random idea.
--Mel
[1] ...asymptotically reached ;)
6:58 a.m.
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 22:41 -0600, Mel Chua wrote:
> So we clearly have an organizational problem. I agree that
there is way
> too much stuff out there. From a management point of view I literally
> live off of the "Docs Project meetings" page. I've almost made it a
> dashboard of items that I need. So I don't actually sift through much
> of the other noise that's out there. But if people can't find something
> that is actually there then that's a problem.
I'm curious whether this might actually be something that could be
tackled well in a sprint - not necessarily a full-blown FAD, but a few
hours during which a bunch of Docs folks run through through this online
and do enough cleanup that it's clear to any casual passerby what the
wiki should look like at 100% completion[1] and what remains to make it
look that way.
A contingent of
new-to-Docs-team-but-who-know-their-way-around-wiki-editing folks would
probably be helpful from a "let's check out what information's findable
and discoverable by people who don't already live in this section of the
wiki" perspective.
Random idea.
--Mel
[1] ...asymptotically reached ;)
Mel,
I got through a lot of the Docs pages the other day. This was basically
the pages that were in Category:Docs Project. We still need to go
through the other categories and see if those pages are still
appropriately categorized and if anything needs to go to the Archive:.
Last year we had a virtual FUDCon over the holidays where we had some
teaching classes and some working periods. Maybe we can do the same
thing this year.
--Eric
5263
days inactive
5268
days old
8 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Eric Christensen -
Ian Weller -
John J. McDonough -
Mel Chua -
Susan Lauber