could we fix the scary upload wiki page?

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:24:46PM -0600, Pete Travis wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 08:21:11AM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
> > > 在 2013-8-13 PM8:41，"Matthew Miller" <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>写道：
> > > > It does when I'm this exhausted from Flock. :)
> > >
> > > So I think this page should be more official like put it into docs.fp.o
> > > instead of wiki page, cuz wiki page can be edited by any people, users
> > are
> > > confused if it's really helpful or just one by one ideas...
> >
> > While I agree that the page should be useful and well curated on the
> > wiki, adding another task to the already well-tasked docs team is not
> > a good move.  Documents like this are likely to change slightly very
> > often, especially during development of new upgrade related features.
> > That makes them poor candidates for official docs that (1) have a much
> > higher barrier to entry for content, and (2) only get a lot of love at
> > specific points in the release cycle.
> >
> > Keep this doc where it is but cleanup efforts are always greatly
> > appreciated.
> >
> > --
> > Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
> >   gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
> >   http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
> >     The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
> >  <https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs>
> >
> 
> We *do* cover this in actively maintained documentation, namely
> http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/ch-upgrade-x86.html.
> While I'm glad that someone has been taking time to keep the
> information
> on the wiki up to date, our practice has been that once the information is
> in a Guide, we focus our attention there rather than maintaining scratch
> wiki pages.
> 
> I can see a problem with the approach, though, and some possible solutions.
> 1) If the wiki page is not the best source for the topic, redirect to the
> Guide that is as required. I'd probably add a note for whoever has been
> maintaining the page to communicate with the guide owner by mail or bz.
> 2) cron a script to convert the Guide content to wiki text and dump it in
> the wiki. Error prone, but it would keep the wiki info going.
> 3) Break the upgrading copy out of the IG an into an independent guide.
> This is really the only way that adding pre-release and rawhide copy to an
> official would make sens
> 4) ?
> 
> In any case, if there's something to be done, it should deduplicate work,
> not require redundant effort.  Granted, editing a wiki page is much easier
> for a casual contributor, but doing that is not likely to bring the
> required changes to the attention of someone maintaining the official
> Guides.  Please, refer your friends and users to the official documentation
> at docs.fedoraproject.org , and keep the feedback coming.

Oh!  I guess like a lot of people, I didn't realize that had
transitioned over to a guide.  The wiki typically should involve
little process, fast change, and "ask forgiveness rather than
permission" wherever possible.  The front page and a few other
governance related pages should be treated with kid gloves, but this
is an example of a page that could just be retired and point to the
guide.

Nothing's lost by removing most of the page content and including a
link to the maintained guide.  I'd recommend that.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
    The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com