[documentation] Contributors to docs need more public recognition

[Steve Dondley]

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen
<freso.dk at gmail.com> wrote:
> Steve Dondley skrev:
>>
>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 1:43 AM, Angela Byron <drupal-docs at webchick.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Steve Dondley wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What's wrong with being as public as possible with patting people on
>>>> the back?
>>>
>>> Well, the things that I mentioned in my previous mails that were glossed
>>> over because of the ownership vs. maintainership clarification:
>>>
>>> - A movement toward individual ownership of *handbook pages*, rather
>>> than community ownership of *the handbook*.
>>> - Additional responsibility laid on the original author which currently
>>> doesn't exist.
>>> - A bulls-eye on the forehead of anyone who contributes documentation,
>>> for easy target practice from people seeking support.
>>> - Sticky questions about who "really" owns $page, when this often isn't
>>> clear or can even possibly be determined.
>>> - Additional administrative overhead for docs team members who could
>>> instead just be writing and improving the docs.
>>
>> I've said repeatedly I'm not attached to that proposal. I really don't
>> care about it so that effectively kills debate on it, doesn't it? [...]
>
> As I read it, all the above concerns apply just as well to your original
> proposal (and was meant as comments to your original proposal as well, if
> I'm not much mistaken) as they did/do to you "maintainer proposal". Stop
> using your dismissal of the "maintainer proposal" as an excuse to easily
> dismiss these (IMHO) valid points/issues.

I think you are mistaken. To be sure, please state exactly which
points from the 2nd proposal for maintainers/owners (now withdrawn),
apply to the first, which is to have a more easily accessible, more
public list of page contributors.

>
>>>> Do you think giving people more credit will help Drupal find more
>>>> contributors? Yes or no? Because that's what this is really about.
>>>
>>> The answer is, I don't know. It's certainly not a motivating factor for
>>> me, personally, nor apparently for the 700+ existing handbook
>>> contributors who are apparently fine and dandy with the existing level
>>> of credit they receive.
>>
>> Well, I can only speculate, but I doubt you would be happy toiling
>> away on Drupal in perfect obscurity. How would have Lullabot ever
>> found you? As great as you are, I still think an ego lurks within. :)
>
> Even if she wasn't given credit, she was still obviously found. Why was she
> found? Probably because she was active. She isn't given credit in the code,
> she isn't given credit in the documentation (well, what I've found). She is
> given credit in the edit history (CVS messages, revisions) and as a
> participant of discussions (mailing list, IRC, issue queue) though, just as
> you are. And this was good enough for them to find her. (Sorry for speaking
> on your behalf, Angie, but I was already answering his mail, so I couldn't
> skip this bit. :p)

Right, we agree, credit is good. It's the grease that fuels the open
source world. You can't have too much of a good thing.

>
>>> However, I can clearly see that it's a
>>> motivating factor for you, which probably means that it's a motivating
>>> factor for some other people out there. Whether dumping a whole bunch of
>>> time and energy into creating some sort of credit system will pay off in
>>> a slew of new documentation contributions, I don't think anyone can say.
>>> I certainly don't think it's a no-brainer, though.
>>
>> I think the changes I proposed will not require "dumping a whole bunch
>> of time and energy." Just to create a simple block to list the
>> contributors to a document page? [...]
>
> It will require PHP/SQL to be written by coders and reviewed by Security
> Team and then implemented by d.o webmasters on d.o. My guess would be that
> this will take more than "an hour or two".

OK, please enlighten me. About how long do you think it would take?

Again, let me be more specific about the requirements:

1) Will generate a single block on each page (hopefully could be cached).
2) Would list all contributors to the existing document page.

Seems like one simple query would generate the block. I don't see any
security risks.

If people are adamant about not being seen in these lists, they could
uncheck a box in the user profile.

Are we on the same page here as far as requirements go?

>
>>> I'd be more +1 towards something like Greg suggests, where we make the
>>> list of handbook maintainers more clear, or even going as silly as
>>> adding little badges next to the names of anyone who contributes to the
>>> handbook. Make the recognition around the act of contributing to the
>>> 'greater good' of the handbook itself, rather than personal glory around
>>> individual pages.
>>>
>>> However, until/unless someone steps up to spec out and code something,
>>> this is all just theoretical discussion. I'm going to get back to coding
>>> now. ;)
>>
>> All real progress starts with discussion. Please don't be so dismissive.
>
> See my first comments, please? :)
>
> --
> Sincerely,
> Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>
>
>



-- 
Prometheus Labor Communications, Inc.
http://prometheuslabor.com
413-572-1300

Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet
http://communicateordie.com