Ubuntuguide.org Considered Harmful

[Aaron Kincer]

You're welcome. I'm not familiar with the round table discussion you 
mentioned. I just joined this list a quite recently.

Jim Tarvid wrote:
> Wow. I wasn't intellectually and emotionally ready for that answer.
>
> Thanks. Your response will provide fodder for the next round table 
> discussion.
>
> Jim
>
> On 6/5/07, Aaron Kincer <kincera at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Whoops, should read:
>>
>> 2) Make information EASY to edit
>>
>> The joys of spell check and the wrong word spelled correctly.
>>
>> Aaron Kincer wrote:
>> > It's no secret that documentation is the least sexy part of the
>> > technical realm. But it seems to me the way to encourage the group
>> > process and achieve accuracy (have your cake and eat it too) is to
>> > achieve as many of the following as possible:
>> >
>> > 1) Make information easy to find
>> > 2) Make information east to edit
>> > 3) Establish a "standard" way to write documentation so someone only
>> > has to drop in their steps in a template
>> > 4) Establish a rank system
>> > 5) Provide attribution
>> >
>> >
>> > I listed those in the order that I think are most important. Finding
>> > information easily is the proverbial chicken (see Google for
>> > reference) and making it easy to edit is the egg (see Wikipedia).
>> > Providing a standard no-brainer way to display information is the next
>> > link in the chain (see Myspace). Lastly, providing attribution and a
>> > rank system complete the gambut (see Slashdot and Digg).
>> >
>> > While an endeavor can be successful with having only one of those, the
>> > more you have, the better off you are. The standard template design
>> > I'm talking about doesn't have to be interface driven like Myspace
>> > even though I used that as an illustration. Although having a "wizard"
>> > type interface to guide someone would make it easier. Otherwise,
>> > people would have to emulate what others do and would require a
>> > cleanup crew to go back and massage entries that are a bit cavalier in
>> > their organization. If you think documentation isn't sexy, try
>> > cleaning up documentation.
>> >
>> > Of course, implementing all of this is a huge endeavor. The immediate
>> > thing that can be done that doesn't require a tremendous effort is a
>> > more straight forward and organized wiki that allows people to be
>> > viewing and editing task oriented information in two clicks or less
>> > from the main wiki screen. I'm thinking:
>> >
>> > Wiki main page -> Click on Feisty Server (or other version) Wiki
>> >
>> > I think from there, it is not out of the question to have categories
>> > to select with a "View All" link at the top for those that have the
>> > bandwidth to pull it all at once and don't want to click through four
>> > links just to figure out how to configure dual head for their nVidia
>> > card. Maybe it would be more expedient just to skip the categories and
>> > have one main Wiki page for a version like UG does.
>> >
>> > While the information in UG may not be relied upon to be completely
>> > accurate, there is a reason it is successful. My opinion is that it is
>> > quick and easy to find what you are looking for (accuracy aside).
>> >
>> > Of course, the decision to make changes such as this does not rest in
>> > my hands and these are only my opinions.
>> >
>> > Aaron Kincer
>> >
>> > Jim Tarvid wrote:
>> >> Merely true!
>> >>
>> >> I run across competing howtos all the time. The academic world
>> >> addresses the issue by "journaling". That doesn't always work either.
>> >> I use a sandbox approach and have reinstalled some things a dozen
>> >> times or more before I get it exactly right.
>> >>
>> >> How do we encourage the group process of many eyes makes better
>> >> documentation?
>> >>
>> >> Jim Tarvid
>> >>
>> >> On 6/5/07, Aaron Kincer <kincera at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Kristian,
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm with you that not all the information there is "good" and can 
>> break
>> >>> your system. Heck, I've seen some instructions there that were just
>> >>> plain wrong without even having to try them out. However, in my
>> >>> opinion,
>> >>> the layout of the UG is much better and easier to find information
>> >>> quickly than the official wiki site you linked to. Until this is
>> >>> addressed, I'm afraid there are some that will not go there first
>> >>> (maybe
>> >>> even at all). In my opinion, there should be links at the very 
>> top to a
>> >>> task oriented wiki similar to UG for each respective version. The 
>> links
>> >>> at the bottom don't lead to help and are just confusing.
>> >>>
>> >>> When someone wants to know how to do something very specific, 
>> trying to
>> >>> sort through the pages there is a bit cumbersome in my humble 
>> opinion.
>> >>> When I have a very specific task I want to accomplish, I'd prefer
>> >>> not to
>> >>> navigate through more than a couple of clicks.
>> >>>
>> >>> Aaron Kincer
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Kristian Hermansen wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> All,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Be wary of Ubuntuguide.org.  When users first encountered it, they
>> >>>> consider it
>> >>>> to be a great resource.  Everything you might need to do is in one
>> >>>> place with info how to accomplish a goal.  However, the problem is
>> >>>> that using Ubuntuguide.org may result in your system becoming 
>> broken
>> >>>> or incorrectly configured.  The guide is not always correct, and 
>> you
>> >>>> may break your system, especially when it comes to upgrade to 
>> the next
>> >>>> release of Ubuntu.  Much of this has to do with adding third party
>> >>>> sources to your APT configuration.  When you do this, your system
>> >>>> could be stable for a few months, until you decide to move to 
>> Gutsy,
>> >>>> and then you wonder why Ubuntu
>> >>>> fails to upgrade!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please please please use http://wiki.ubuntu.com or the other
>> >>>> help/community resources at the official Ubuntu domain ahead of any
>> >>>> other resource.  Once you realized that Ubuntuguide is harmful, 
>> make
>> >>>> every effort to support the official wiki and add items there.  
>> Some
>> >>>> people on this list may not realize the harm that can be done if 
>> you
>> >>>> add unofficial items to your APT sources.  This is one of the major
>> >>>> issues with UG, as they are always suggesting you do this.  With
>> >>>> Ubuntu,  you normally don't need to do this, since most software 
>> is in
>> >>>> the hosted repositories.  Again, Ubuntuguide.org should be 
>> avoided at
>> >>>> all times...
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> ubuntu-server mailing list
>> >>> ubuntu-server at lists.ubuntu.com
>> >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>