Re: Documentation

[Adam Atlas]

On Tuesday, September 24, 2002, at 07:40  PM, Alexander Malmberg wrote:

> Well, the entire site doesn't have to be devoted to this; there are 
> lots
> of other things a I think a GNUstep wiki might be useful for. As long 
> as
> the spec part is set aside and self-contained, it should work.

That's a good idea. I think we should try to set up a general GNUstep 
wiki which includes documentation. I've set up two wikis before, so I 
have experience with this.

> > As I said, most implementations of Wiki store complete revision
> > history. If we were to set up a Wiki, it could be up-to-the-minute
> > contributed and official documentation, and then the GNUstep 
> > developers
> > could decide what goes into the official documentation.
>
> This would be a very good arrangement, though I still have a few
> concerns about distributing, change control (well, change 
> notification),
> and editing (my browser isn't my favorite text editor). Being able to
> easily attach comments and updates to the official stuff sounds like a
> very nice thing, though, so I think it'd be interesting to try :).

About change notification: The original Wiki code is written in perl, 
and could easily be modified to send notifications to a certain email 
address upon the modification of a page whose name starts with NS or GS 
for example. Also, Wiki automatically maintains a RecentChanges page.

"My browser isn't my favorite text editor": Wiki reads plain text, not 
HTML, and converts it as needed. HTML isn't usually allowed, but it 
supports several tags that can be used to perform several HTML-like 
functions. So this isn't really a problem, and if you want to, of 
course, you can do editing in another program and paste into the 
browser.

Anyone else have any comments on this?

--
Adam Atlas

Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue