Submitted by jam (not verified) on Tue, 05/05/2009 - 23:59.
Thanks for this, Addi. This thread already feels like consensus-progress (so important in OSS projects).
Glad you agree that an open edit tab isn't enough, too. A semi-empowered user in a sort-of democracy of other semi-empowered users cannot make the fundamental changes we all (seem to) agree we need. Managing and updating documentation is not quite like managing code. To get the documentation in a better state, we need a strong editor or two who are the documentation equivalent to branch maintainers. This very small pool of people should have the accepted "right" - or better, mandate - to (re)define structures; remove entire nodes, putting their essential content into other nodes; move around and redefine chapters, sections, and so on. Major forestry.
Thanks for this, Addi. This thread already feels like consensus-progress (so important in OSS projects).
Glad you agree that an open edit tab isn't enough, too. A semi-empowered user in a sort-of democracy of other semi-empowered users cannot make the fundamental changes we all (seem to) agree we need. Managing and updating documentation is not quite like managing code. To get the documentation in a better state, we need a strong editor or two who are the documentation equivalent to branch maintainers. This very small pool of people should have the accepted "right" - or better, mandate - to (re)define structures; remove entire nodes, putting their essential content into other nodes; move around and redefine chapters, sections, and so on. Major forestry.
I look forward to doing my part!