[documentation] A New Approach to Drupal Tutorials

[Nick Lewis]

Charlie, you must be pretty far ahead of your time. So what's a good 
next step? I could setup a proof of concept site today on my server, so 
that we're all on the same page in so far as what we're building and how 
it would work.

I think moderation of the posts that come through would serve less as a 
protectionary measure, and more as a way to keep the info well 
organized. THe big weekness of feeding in posts, usually, is that it 
gets thrown together in a page of "blog barf"(as one of my clients called).

Does this sound like a reasonable next step?
-Nick

Charlie Lowe wrote:

>
>
> Nick Lewis wrote:
>
>> Here is a really nutty idea. I regularly write drupal tutorials at my 
>> blog, and file them under the term "drupal tutorials":
>> http://nicklewis.smartcampaigns.com/taxonomy/term/177
>
>
> I don't think this is nutty at all. I suggested 2 1/2 years ago that 
> we think about using Drupal aggregation as a method to push content to 
> a site rather than seeing it as a pull technology:
>
> http://cyberdash.com/a-blog-hub-using-drupal-to-create-a-better-community-weblog 
>
>
>
>>
>> I've been asked a couple of times to publish some of them at 
>> drupal.org, but I am a busy and lazy person and haven't really 
>> figured out how to do that. I suspect many of my fellows who write 
>> drupal tutorials are in similar situations. However, we now have some 
>> handy modules like aggregator2 that allow us to take a creative 
>> alternative approach:
>>
>> Using aggregator2 we could take in feeds from drupal developers who 
>> write tutorials (and who give drupal.org permission). 
>
>
> Permission would (should) be granted by using the CC license that 
> drupal.org uses.
>
>>
>> So aggregator2 would feed in new tutorials, and save them as full 
>> fledged nodes at drupal.org. We'd probably at first leave the nodes 
>> unpublished as a distinct node type in the submission queue. When a 
>> new tutorial pops up, all documentation people would have to do is 
>> review it, and file under whatever appropriate taxonomy term they 
>> choose. The end result could be a properly reviewed, organized 
>> library of articles that is created with minimal effort on the part 
>> of documentation writers, and minimal barriers for the writers of 
>> tutorials. This seems to be a win-win that could greatly increase the 
>> amount of quality content on drupal.org while reducing the amount of 
>> work the docs team has to do.
>
>
> I don't believe the submission queue is necessary. Those who are 
> pushing content to Drupal could (should) supply the appropriate 
> taxonomy terms on their own. Once it is on drupal.org, documentation 
> maintainers could choose to add tutorials into the book outline.
> -- 
> Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
> List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
>