<div>On 11/4/06, Luzius Thoeny <<a href="mailto:lucius.antonius@gmail.com">lucius.antonius@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Brian Lawson wrote: > After reading some responses, I wanted to clarify what I envisioned <a href="http://xubuntuguide.org">xubuntuguide.org</a> to be.  I hope for it to be very much like <a href="http://ubuntuguide.org"> ubuntuguide.org</a>.  If you haven't checked it out, go there and scroll through it a bit…it will help give some context to this question. > > It is very much an "unofficial" Ubuntu site, which is why I hesitate to attach it to the official (and Canonical-supported) site.  For example, <a href="http://ubuntuguide.org">ubuntuguide.org</a> contains instructions for adding repositories that contain unsupported, non-free, or possibly illegal packages.  While extremely useful, I don't know that the official site would want to be responsible for this content. > > But on the other hand, I don't want to dilute or fracture any momentum the Xubuntu project has going…I want to respect the wishes of the main team, contributors, and users. > > -Brian > > > > > > Hi Brian (& others), First off, thanks for offering the domain and the hosting! I personally like  <a href="http://ubuntuguide.org">ubuntuguide.org</a> and its style a lot. the thought of coming up with something similar for Xubuntu seems like an excellent idea. A few thoughts: - We should keep an eye on what's going on with <a href="http://ubuntuguide.org">ubuntuguide.org</a>, because the current owner seems to consider moving the content to official ubuntu documentation. see this thread: <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/2006-November/007304.html">https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/2006-November/007304.html</a> . To me, it looks like that won't happen, because of the recommendation of automatix and other non-official stuff which won't be accepted in the official help. - How will this <a href="http://xubuntuguide.org">xubuntuguide.org</a> relate to the current desktop guide? is it a good idea to "clone" all the information, risking of having to constantly fix & update in both? i guess we can look at it this way: the desktop guide is more of a 'starter' for people wanting to get to know Xubuntu, while the <a href="http://xubuntuguide.org">xubuntuguide.org </a> gives the quick&dirty 'hands-on' recipe for people who are looking for a specific answer. - Do we keep it strictly to Xubuntu-related stuff or also other? first has the problem that users will not find what they need (they may not know if their question is xubuntu-specific), and the second has the problem of "cloning" lots of content, leading to maintenance head-aches. - Please note also that there's something similar for ubuntu here: <a href="https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CommonQuestions">https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CommonQuestions</a> - While I don't have anything against MediaWiki, I think it's definitely not the best looking wiki out there... I personally liked the old look&feel of <a href="http://ubuntuguide.org">ubuntuguide.org</a> a lot better that it had before it was using MediaWiki. luzi -- xubuntu-devel mailing list <a href="mailto:xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com"> xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com</a> <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel</a> </blockquote></div> I think it can live along the Xubuntu Desktop Guide very nicely. As you said, the DG is introducing the basics (and I do think it does a very good job) and the Xubuntuguide can help with tweaking. The <a href="http://Xubuntu.org">Xubuntu.org</a> site is searched a lot for e.g. Beryl/Compiz and XGL/AIGLX and things like that. On the other hand, there also are some idiots that like to search for sex or porno ;) -- Vincent