[documentation] Proposal to deprecate the docs mailing list

[Shai Gluskin]

This whole conversation is just screaming out to mobilize advocating for a
few basic improvements on g.d.o. I agree with Nat's suggestions for pushing
through full messages in notifications and installing mailhandler.

I agree that Wiki functionality on g.d.o without history and diff is
useless. I'd like to hear more details about what is holding this up? Is it
a problem specific to OG? It's pretty basic functionality.

*I think we should use whatever clout we have as an important group within
the Drupal community to get the needed changes to g.d.o. As Nat also said,
every other group is probably screaming for this also. Let's band together.*

What kind of example are we setting when tasks that clearly fall into the
realm of "Community Plumbing" are not being handled by Drupal?

Yes, e-mail has been the killer ap for a whole generation. It can be hard to
move away from it. But the future is server and not client. It's the
"Semantic Web" and not the junk heap on your (my) hard drive. We aren't
there yet, but I feel like it helps move everything forward when we are
willing to be guinea pigs in attempting to actually use the technology we
are developing.

It was interesting hearing Angie's story of how the D7 core folks use
drupal.org pages for a similar need. Clever! But I would call that a
"community plumbing hack." I don't want to start replicating hacks. I'd
rather try to get g.d.o fixed!

My 3 cents,

Shai

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Addison Berry <drupal at rocktreesky.com>wrote:

>
> On Nov 20, 2008, at 9:28 PM, Angela Byron wrote:
>
> > If the main idea is to have central rallying points for organizing
> > stuff, then... why not do so right on Drupal.org?
> >
> > For example, http://drupal.org/please-review-my-patch is a sort of
> > "ad-
> > hoc" page that members of the Drupal 7 core development team use to
> > escalate issues up to me that are either "quickies" that could be
> > committed while I'm on one of my many daily phone calls, or that
> > really need core maintainer intervention because they are dead-locked
> > in discussion or need architectural advice. And, unlike
> > groups.drupal.org, drupal.org has no problem displaying the revision
> > log: http://drupal.org/node/309321/revisions. And finally, it's really
> > nice because you can do short-hand [#xxxxx] to automatically link to
> > relevant issues.
> >
> > Not sure if this will address the current needs of the docs team, but
> > it's worth a thought?
>
> Hm. Hm. Well, yeah it works in certain ways, but the main uses we have
> for wiki pages is for temporary stuff, like drafting up a forum post
> announcement to go to the front page or working out a new outline for
> a section of the handbook. How would we handle not cluttering up with
> lots and lots of these kind of pages that will never be used as real
> handbook pages? I guess we could just have a doc team book. That isn't
> as "stumble-upon-able" by casual contributors (which is one of my
> goals). Hm. The only other disadvantage would be that there is no
> email notification from handbook pages, but at least people could see
> them in their d.o tracker, which would be nice.
>
> I still feel like that is harder for casual contributors to notice and
> get involved, but yeah, we could give that go in terms of at least
> being able to work together. Something to consider.
>
>
>
> --
> Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
> List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/attachments/20081120/696b6c0b/attachment.htm