Re: Wiki-fying docs

[Weapon of Mass Deduction <blacklist@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Justin C. Sherrill wrote:
> I've noticed that there's been a number of people who have wanted to
> contribute to docs, but the process of installing the doc-proj port and
> all its dependencies, plus talking SGML, plus building it, is forming a
> sort of barrier to entry.  I think I'm the only poor soul that's done it.
>
> I was thinking we could copy the existing docs into a Wiki, and see how
> contributions change from there.  Mashing wiki changes back into CVS may
> be less laborious than putting other people through the docproj wringer. 
> Can anyone think of any objections?

It would be wise have two documentations. A documentation managed by the 
'fans', which should be easily editable (for which a Wiki is a good 
candidate). Secondly, the offical documentation, which can be the 
current one of course.

I think Wiki is nice, but not convenient for official, portable docs.
This, however, doesn't necessarily disallows to have an easy and
simply editable documentation.

Of course, the maintainers of the offical docs should peek now and then,
to see if there are some things not covered in their docs, but are in 
the unofficial documentation.