ubuntu at kitterman.com
Mon Sep 24 18:04:51 BST 2007
On Monday 24 September 2007 09:55, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 21.09.2007, 21:02 +0900 schrieb Emmet Hikory:
> > 1) When moving something, make sure to change all the pages that link
> > to that something
> > 2) Check for external links, and ensure redirects for those (i.e.
> > Google: link: http://wiki...)
> > 3) Review the existing redirects, and ensure they don't point to a
> > redirect
> Sounds good.
> > It's hard to get consensus on changing the Wiki. There have been
> > a couple attempts to clean up during this cycle, including a fairly
> > productive session in Sevilla. While I agree with the preference for
> > consensus for this type of change, I'm not sure that this particular
> > work can be accomplished without a "just do it" attitude.
> Absolutely. We have tried to 'fix docs' before, with bad results. I see
> only one solution to deal with our resources reasonably: dissect the
> MOTU wiki pages into sections of interest and function.
> My proposal:
> * MOTU: carefully chosen MOTU docs (things as MOTU/Meetings,
> MOTU/Council, etc.) - things that have a meaning and are well
> * UbuntuDevelopment: process docs
> * PackagingGuide: packaging information
This sounds reasonable. In cases where Main and Universe processes are
different (e.g. SRU) it is often confusing for people to know what to do.
I'm not sure if it is better to have both processes on one page or separate
pages, but we ought to be consistent.
Is the packaging information meant to be all inclusive or how Ubuntu packaging
is different from Debian packaging? If we use the Debian documentation (e.g.
New Maintainer's Guide) as a baseline and provide an Ubuntu diff in the wiki
it should be more manageable maintenance wise, but will, of course, be more
confusing for people just getting started.
More information about the ubuntu-devel