Wiki Pages that need love

[Patrice Dumas]

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:07:40AM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:EPEL
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL -- no changes I can see.

I psopose to merge a simple text after 'EPEL for Contributors', see
below.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/About -- does this make sense to
> how EPEL is being used these days?

It doesn't do harm, in my opinion. I find this page well written and
think that it can be kept as is.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/AskForFedoraPackageInEPEL -- seems ok.

Right.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/CommunicationPlan -- not sure this
> is current.

I don't really see the interest of this page, it is largely duplicate of
the About page, and I think that the text is less clear. The faq links
to an entry in that page (ISV), though. What is interesting should be
merged in About, in my opinion.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ContributorStatus -- not current.

I think that the list of fedora packagers not interested should be kept
and merged in the main EPEL/ContributorStatus page, the other list 
removed, except for Ville entry which would also be in
EPEL/ContributorStatus. Then there should be a way to query from the
database all the maintainers that maintain at least one EL branch. I'll
mail Toshio to ask whether it is possible. And the text on this page
should certainly be shortened.
 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ -- rewrite time.

I have read it, and I only found a reference to owners.list that should
be changed, but otherwise I don't see what's wrong.
 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies -- update

I suggest remomving the 
How will the repository actually look like? 
part since it is both wrong and unuseful.

EPEL branching if Fedora maintainer does not react
is covered in more detail elsewhere.

I am not sure that this section fits here:
Involve Employers: Packaging as a Job Duty

Otherwise everything else looks good to me. 

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/PackageMaintainer/GenericJobDescription
> -- review please

Looks good. I don't really get the interest of this page, but it is
linked from many other docs, and I think that I have the background to
comment about that page.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ReleaseManagers -- update/rewrite.

I think that this page should better be rewritten from scratch. It would
be nice to have something about EPEL infrastructure, indeeed.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SIG combine with about?

I don't think this page is needed anymore. I would propose instead to
merge what is interesting in this page to the front EPEL page. The
contact information is already here, the only missing information is how
to join but it is so simple that it doesn't really requirers a specific
page, I think that a short text right after 'EPEL for Contributors'
should be enough, along:

Joining EPEL s as simple as being part of Fedora (e.g. be a part of the
packager group in the account system) and having a love for Enterprise
Linux. Details are in the [[EPEL/FAQ#Contributing_to_EPEL| FAQ entry on
contributing]].

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Schedule -- MASSIVE CLEANUP

Somebody from the steering commitee should certainly rewrite it.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- dead tree

Looks like a personnal list, can be kept but should not be linked from
anywhere. Currently it is linked from EPEL/Schedule, but this page has
to be rewritten anyway.

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/WishList ??? is this still useful.
> Basically what isn't wanted in EL-4/5?

Maybe there could be instead a query to packagedb that shows packages
that don't have an EPEL branch. But I am not sure that it is very
interesting, in my personal case all the packages that are not in EPEL
are not there on purpose.

Most is deprecated, and otherwise it is a duplicate of the list of 
packagers not interested in EPEL.



As always I can do the changes I advocate if agreed.

--
Pat