[documentation] New Handbook Page for Review... And a More General Question

Tue Feb 2 01:45:07 UTC 2010

As much as I really do agree that it would be great to have some more formal
acknowledgment, and that it should certainly be a consideration as maybe
another phase of the redesign and development of docs.drupal.org, in the
meantime, I think it's a bit of a matter of self promoting.

- List your contributions on your d.o profile
- Blog about your achievements
- Add it to your bio on your company's website

And never negate the worth of Drupal karma - I have seen my perceived worth
and the amount of respect I get in the community grow significantly through
working on docs.

But yes, let's put that on the agenda of things to work out - why not file
an issue?
A.

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Shai Gluskin <shai at content2zero.com> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> Re: Josh, given that at your first glance you thought there was a security
> problem... even though it was from not reading thoroughly, I'm concerned
> othes will read similarly. So I changed some the intro to the following:
>
> An alternative, detailed here, is for the *site developer* to place PHP
> code into the "PHP Code" fieldset below the allowed values box on the
> textfield set-up page in order to populate the list by parsing the text
> stored in a node.
>
>
> I've removed the credit at the bottom.
>
> But it raises a larger issue... which is how to promote more documentation
> writing within Drupal.
>
> By comparison... let's look at developers in the Drupal ecosystem... For
> those who want to get at the heart of the beast, who have LOTS of patience
> and not much interest in getting credit, there is Drupal core. For those who
> want to be in charge, have less patience and want to be king of something...
> they can be involved in module development. Some folks do both, but it seems
> like there is a personality difference in the two types of people. So the
> question is, "How can we make writing documentation more motivating form
> more people to want to participate?"
>
> Shai
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Ariane Khachatourians <
> arianekhachatourians at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just had a skim.
>>
>> I would agree and say it's pretty well a policy not to credit yourself on
>> the pages (though I would keep the links to the other two pages if they are
>> useful as references). It does indeed discourage others from updating the
>> pages, and sort of clutters up the pages if a lot of people have worked on
>> them.
>>
>> If people want to know who's worked on pages, all they need to is look at
>> the revisions tab.
>>
>> Otherwise, formatting and such looks pretty good.
>> A.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Joshua Brauer <joshua at brauerranch.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Um... OK so I didn't read this correctly... The PHP issue isn't what it
>>> looked like at first glance....
>>>
>>>
>>>  Thanks,
>>> Josh
>>>
>>> --
>>> Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jbrauer
>>>
>>> On Feb 1, 2010, at 6:01 PM, Joshua Brauer wrote:
>>>
>>> Any user with the permissions to post PHP code to your site has
>>> permissions much greater than 'administer content types'. In fact they can
>>> give themselves 'administer content types' permissions should they choose
>>> to.
>>>
>>> I thought we had a policy against the credit links but maybe it's just
>>> been a discussion. In short, in my opinion, the credit links discourage
>>> others from editing pages as appropriate, clutter the page, and become a
>>> problem as to "at what point when I've edited the page should I remove those
>>> credit links from two years ago".
>>>
>>>  Thanks,
>>> Josh
>>>
>>> --
>>> Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jbrauer
>>>
>>> On Feb 1, 2010, at 4:53 PM, Shai Gluskin wrote:
>>>
>>> A friend of mine (he's newish to Drupal, this is his first handbook
>>> page... go Laurance Rosenzweig @rosetwig) and I wrote a new handbook page
>>> for the Reference: snippets section called, "Managing a CCK allowed
>>> values list without granting 'administer content types' access."
>>>
>>> It's at: http://drupal.org/node/701774
>>>
>>> Three kinds of feedback would be appreciated:
>>>
>>>    1. Tell me there is a much easier way (I'm dreading this one... hope
>>>    that is NULL)
>>>    2. Review the handbook page and make improvements (it's directly
>>>    editable by all d.o. users as are other handbook pages).
>>>    3. Give feedback on the "credits" at the end. Laurance in writing it
>>>    up listed our names as creators of the tutorial. That's pretty rare on
>>>    handbook pages, isn't it? I'm wondering if that is a part of d.o. culture
>>>    that might be worth changing. I understand that handbook pages evolve with
>>>    their wiki style. But the revisions list preserves that. And module pages
>>>    often have "originally written by" lines in them even as the new maintainer
>>>    identifies him/herself. What do you think.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Shai
>>>  --
>>> Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
>>> List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
>>> List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
>> List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/
>>
>
>
> --
> 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/20100201/02a2249a/attachment-0001.html 