203 lines
9.1 KiB
HTML
203 lines
9.1 KiB
HTML
<!-- MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
|
|
<!--X-Subject: Re: mini-HOWTO -->
|
|
<!--X-From-R13: Unel Znjerapr [hecul <tnelzNpnanqn.pbz> -->
|
|
<!--X-Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 16:26:26 -0500 (EST) -->
|
|
<!--X-Message-Id: m3vh4hlubm.fsf@maya.linux.ca -->
|
|
<!--X-Content-Type: text/plain -->
|
|
<!--X-Reference: 20000124233050.A22764@morgana.systemy.it -->
|
|
<!--X-Reference: 388CDAB8.579A83E3@cu-portland.edu -->
|
|
<!--X-Head-End-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML//EN">
|
|
<html>
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>Re: mini-HOWTO</title>
|
|
<link rev="made" href="mailto:garym@canada.com">
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<!--X-Body-Begin-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
[<a href="msg01148.html">Date Prev</a>][<a href="msg01150.html">Date Next</a>][<a href="msg01138.html">Thread Prev</a>][<a href="msg01150.html">Thread Next</a>][<a href="maillist.html#01149">Date Index</a>][<a href="threads.html#01149">Thread Index</a>]
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-->
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-Begin-->
|
|
<h1>Re: mini-HOWTO</h1>
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><em>To</em>: Gregory Leblanc <<A HREF="mailto:gleblanc@cu-portland.edu">gleblanc@cu-portland.edu</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Subject</em>: Re: mini-HOWTO</li>
|
|
<li><em>From</em>: Gary Lawrence Murphy <<A HREF="mailto:garym@canada.com">garym@canada.com</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Date</em>: 25 Jan 2000 16:23:09 -0500</li>
|
|
<li><em>Cc</em>: Alessandro Rubini <<A HREF="mailto:rubini@gnu.org">rubini@gnu.org</A>>, LDP Discuss List <<A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Organization</em>: TCI: Business Innovation through Open Source Computing</li>
|
|
<li><em>References</em>: <20000124233050.A22764@morgana.systemy.it> <<a href="msg01137.html">388CDAB8.579A83E3@cu-portland.edu</a>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Reply-to</em>: Gary Lawrence Murphy <<A HREF="mailto:garym@canada.com">garym@canada.com</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-cc</em>: recipient list not shown: ;</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-date</em>: 25 Jan 2000 21:26:12 -0000</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-from</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-message-id</em>: <sk1xPD.A.QOD.0Thj4@murphy></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-sender</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Sender</em>: <A HREF="mailto:garym@mail.wccweb.com">garym@mail.wccweb.com</A></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-Begin-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-->
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
As we say in North America: "Close but no cigar" or perhaps "standing
|
|
on the right road, but going in the wrong direction"
|
|
|
|
>>>>> "G" == Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc@cu-portland.edu> writes:
|
|
|
|
>> I think the LDP should insist on being notified *before*
|
|
>> people start writing.
|
|
|
|
G> That IS part of what the LDP is here to do. If one reads the
|
|
G> LDP website, and/or the HOWTO-HOWTO (I can't remember where it
|
|
G> was) it says that you should attempt to contact the HOWTO
|
|
G> coordinator before you begin writing anything.
|
|
|
|
And indeed it does.
|
|
|
|
>> It's a big problem of image, quality must be much more
|
|
>> important than quantity, and people must be used to this.
|
|
|
|
IMHO, while the LDP is amazing, let's not kid ourselves about quality.
|
|
|
|
The quality control is non-existant. There is no tagging of documents
|
|
to versions, no consistency of distribution variations, no tracking of
|
|
user stats and no stakeholder review, and many ancient docs which
|
|
should be weeded out are kept because "they are all we have on that
|
|
subject".
|
|
|
|
The LDP is, however, still _amazing_ : it is amazing that it exists at
|
|
all, entirely out of volunteer labour and community support. Even the
|
|
FSF spawned nothing like it despite a 10 year head start. But let's
|
|
be real here: We have no docs, not one, in the entire LDP collection
|
|
to compare with the EMACS, ELISP or GLIB manuals from the FSF. Those
|
|
are quality works worthy of being published as books. What we have
|
|
are disjoint read-me's and man pages by comparison.
|
|
|
|
>> *must* be strict technical review, and only good documents must
|
|
>> be approved. At least, there must be a "blessed" set of
|
|
>> documents and a "mass" of contributed stuff, either badly
|
|
>> written, or incorrect, or just redundant of other documents.
|
|
|
|
And who does this judging? We could also use some editorial revisions,
|
|
but it won't happen without a business plan; it's hard enough to find
|
|
people to create documents, but to ask someone else to revise them is
|
|
somewhat pushing the realm of possibilities.
|
|
|
|
>> To this aim, we need a charismatic leader or group of leaders,
|
|
>> who can accept and refuse works without offending anybody.
|
|
|
|
No, we need a process whereby docs can be rated and comments attached
|
|
by the user base. We need stats to show which docs are actually read,
|
|
and a followup process which asks the reader if the doc was actually
|
|
helpful. This is basic Customer Support 101.
|
|
|
|
Maybe we should treat authors like software authors: When someone is
|
|
the maintainer of a software package, they put their email address on
|
|
it. They _expect_ to receive bug reports and gripes which are then
|
|
folded back into the software to improve it. When it gets to be too
|
|
much for them, they hand the reigns to someone else.
|
|
|
|
How about this: A new display engine on the website which lists the
|
|
requested doc in the right frame, but down the left margin lists
|
|
the title, the date, author contact info and the version numbers of
|
|
mentioned software. Below this is a survey form that says "How
|
|
useful is this doc?" Then, once we have a significant database of
|
|
reviews, when someone searches for a doc, the search results page
|
|
shows the title of the document followed by its review metrics, its
|
|
age and the version numbers.
|
|
|
|
Maybe a requirement for LDP authors should be an explicit ownership
|
|
clause in the submission process which says "You agree to maintain
|
|
this component" --- if someone doesn't want the great hoards of users
|
|
sending them email to complain about a typo, them maybe an LDP doc is
|
|
not for them, or they should add their doc to the "unmaintained" list.
|
|
|
|
Part of this is also proper dating of material. All LDP docs should
|
|
say right at the top the date of last revision, and the search engine
|
|
results must tell me this. What good is it to find a ppp-2.1 or a
|
|
kernel-2.0 doc? Maybe I really am looking for help with old
|
|
technology, but I will bet real money most queries against the LDP
|
|
search engine are looking for help with the most recent Linux
|
|
distributions --- the vast majority of the Linux users out there today
|
|
have been using Linux for less than a year.
|
|
|
|
>> This is how free software works: there always is a maintainer
|
|
>> who accepts and refuses contributions, and nobody ever sends in
|
|
>> stuff pretending it gets accepted.
|
|
|
|
And so there should be, but, like software, we want a maintainer for
|
|
each and every doc, not one all powerful overlord for the entire
|
|
collection, and like freshmeat, the LDP need not pass any judgement
|
|
but let the community at large determine the worth of each.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Gary Lawrence Murphy <garym@linux.ca>: office voice/fax: 01 519 4222723
|
|
TCI - Business Innovations through Open Source : <A HREF="http://www.teledyn.com">http://www.teledyn.com</A>
|
|
Canadian Co-ordinators for Bynari International : <A HREF="http://ca.bynari.net/">http://ca.bynari.net/</A>
|
|
Moderator, Linux Education Group: <A HREF="http://www.egroups.com/group/linux-ed">http://www.egroups.com/group/linux-ed</A>
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
|
|
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="01150" href="msg01150.html">Processing HOWTOs</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Stein Gjoen <sgjoen@mail.nyx.net></li></ul></li>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="01151" href="msg01151.html">Re: mini-HOWTO</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Terry Dawson <terry@animats.net></li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
|
|
<!--X-References-->
|
|
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="01137" href="msg01137.html">Re: mini-HOWTO</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc@cu-portland.edu></li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-References-End-->
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>Prev by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg01148.html">Re: mailing list archives</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg01150.html">Processing HOWTOs</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Previous by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg01138.html">Re: mini-HOWTO</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg01150.html">Processing HOWTOs</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Index(es):
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a href="maillist.html#01149"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="threads.html#01149"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|