Ubuntu Wiki Discussion forums [Archive]

brentoboy

October 24th, 2005, 10:35 PM

based on the conversation in this thread:
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=81205

I would like to request a forum for the purpose of allowing people to post wiki pages that need to be imporved, and generate some discussion about what could be in them.

It seems that people are more vocal in a discussion environment, and there is more activity. For some reason, people shy away from editing the official wiki (and that is probably a good thing).

The primary focus of the forums would be to have the end result of a thread end in some brave soul actually updating the wiki with the info that everyone posts on a topic.

People would be encouraged to post FAQs from the forums as possible wiki entries, or find pages that are out of date or that could use more info from the existing wiki pages.

This sort of project would encourage people to go from the forums to the wiki, and it would eventaully result in more good stuff in the wiki. Kind of win-win. It also lets those people who are scared of wiki editing contribute in thier own way.

I'd be happy to help as a volunteer to oversee the project, (how much time commitment is involved in moderating a forum?)

jnoreiko

October 25th, 2005, 12:00 PM

The primary focus of the forums would be to have the end result of a thread end in some brave soul actually updating the wiki with the info that everyone posts on a topic.

The whole point of a wiki is that everyone can edit.
I can see that it's a good idea to have a discussion area though, and some people might need encouragement.
But if someone suggests a good idea for the wiki or a good piece of information, I'd say to them 'add it yourself'. :)

One important problem with the wiki is that fact that saving pages is very slow. This needs to be looked at, because it puts people off.

October 25th, 2005, 12:26 PM

brentoboy

October 25th, 2005, 12:39 PM

I'd say to them 'add it yourself'. :)

updating the wiki is "scary."
newbies know what they wish would have been in there, but dont know enough to actually chagne it. They could post a request to change it. Posting something in a forum is not scary. (which explains why so much happens on the forums compared to the wiki).

I actually thought about looking through the wiki for old "hoarty/warty" stuff that needed updating for breezy, but couldnt bring myself to change anything, because I really didnt know if I knew enough to give good advice. But, if several people commented before it went "live" it wouldnt be so bad.

imagine

October 25th, 2005, 01:31 PM

For some reason, people shy away from editing the official wiki (and that is probably a good thing).I can only speak for me, but I don't shy away. I just don't want to register yet another account to work on the wiki. IMHO it's a shame that even after so many discussions and the success of lots of other wikis, especially wikipedia, some people still insist that you *must* register to participate in a wiki/forum/chat/etc.

brentoboy

October 25th, 2005, 02:21 PM

I can only speak for me, but I don't shy away. I just don't want to register yet another account to work on the wiki. IMHO it's a shame that even after so many discussions and the success of lots of other wikis, especially wikipedia, some people still insist that you *must* register to participate in a wiki/forum/chat/etc.

I was kind of bummed when I had to register for the wiki when I had already signed up as an active ubunter for the forums. I sort of expected them to be the same usergroup. But, im signed up with the wiki, I just havent felt knowledgable enough to contribute to the "official" documentation.

Of course, on the forums, I'll chime in with bad advice all day long, becuase it doenst have the "mantra of officialness".

The worst part about the whole thing is that it isnt really me that you have to convince to go ahead and update the wiki, its everyone. One at a time. That is a bit daunting.

mlomker

October 25th, 2005, 03:56 PM

I was kind of bummed when I had to register for the wiki when I had already signed up as an active ubunter for the forums

That's because the current wiki isn't actually a part of the forums. I think Ubuntu set them up.

I tried working with it one afternoon but I hate the fact that I have to learn yet another markup language. The fact that the forum works so well is also a part of the 'problem' there. To me the wiki seems like a solution looking for a problem.

October 25th, 2005, 04:50 PM

The wiki UserDocumentation page (or a similar page) is like an Ubuntuguide that we can *all* work on. You need a few people who comb the forums for worthy material and port it over there. The forum-wiki team has been in the works for something like five months.

Things are coming along. The last news I had heard was from Kassetra who was going to implement a way for people to report suchworthy posts to the wiki team so that they would not have to do all the leg work. This was just over two weeks ago....

October 25th, 2005, 04:52 PM

I was kind of bummed when I had to register for the wiki when I had already signed up as an active ubunter for the forums. I sort of expected them to be the same usergroup. But, im signed up with the wiki, I just havent felt knowledgable enough to contribute to the "official" documentation.

Of course, on the forums, I'll chime in with bad advice all day long, becuase it doenst have the "mantra of officialness".

The worst part about the whole thing is that it isnt really me that you have to convince to go ahead and update the wiki, its everyone. One at a time. That is a bit daunting.

A month ago, at the Community Council meeting, this problem was addressed. I think three or four different people volunteered to write the code for Ubuntugeek to unify the login between the forums and the wiki/launchpad.

I do not know what is going on with that....

brentoboy

October 25th, 2005, 05:18 PM

That's because the current wiki isn't actually a part of the forums. I think Ubuntu set them up.

I tried working with it one afternoon but I hate the fact that I have to learn yet another markup language. The fact that the forum works so well is also a part of the 'problem' there. To me the wiki seems like a solution looking for a problem.

Maybe half of the solution is to get the posters who are ussually the ones doing the helping to go look it up in the wiki, and then *very politly* point them to the right place in the wiki, and ask them to start there, and come ask questions if that isnt enough.

--
On a side note, I remember when I first got started I noticed that you had a strong tendancy to offer good advice that was "by the book" and if you arent one of those working on the wiki, I dont know who would be.

brentoboy

October 25th, 2005, 05:20 PM

A month ago, at the Community Council meeting, ....

Community Council meeting? - cool.

who is the community council, do they live in the same area or is it a virtual meeting? it is open attendance?...

are there minutes we can look at?

October 25th, 2005, 05:27 PM

Community Council meeting? - cool.

who is the community council, do they live in the same area or is it a virtual meeting? it is open attendance?...

are there minutes we can look at?
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncil
The Ubuntu Community Council is the primary community (i.e., non-technical) governance body for the Ubuntu project. Members are appointed Mark Shuttleworth and approved by a vote by the entire Ubuntu membership.

The Community Council meets every two weeks on IRC, in the #ubuntu-meeting channel on the Freenode network. More information on the council and on Ubuntu governance in general is on the Ubuntu governance page.

http://www.ubuntulinux.org/community/processes/governance/
https://wiki.ubuntu.com//CommunityCouncilAgenda

There are no private or closed meetings in Ubuntu.

mlomker

October 25th, 2005, 06:01 PM

up in the wiki, and then *very politly* point them to the right place in the wiki, and ask them to start

I've done that a few times but today half of the wiki relates to Warty. I still haven't heard a compelling answer to my question, though: What makes the wiki a better solution than our current Customizations forums?

October 25th, 2005, 06:25 PM

The wiki is a distillation of many sources, including the forums.

You can have twleve threads about the same topic on the forums. You have to search through all of them to get an answer that works. The point is for someone (a team - a wiki team!) to go through all twelve posts (perhaps as they are written, over time) and keep the good stuff and put it on the wiki. That way, what is on the wiki is checked and sorted by more than one person.

The wiki is a knowedgebase and that is for the information, the forums are to talk about it.

The format of the content in the forums is less straightforward than that of wiki pages.

mlomker

October 25th, 2005, 06:43 PM

The format of the content in the forums is less straightforward than that of wiki pages.

I hear that, but that could also be resolved by having a read-only forum with pristine posts that have been culled from the other postings. I've gotten a little aggressive with my ATI how-to and used the forum to refine it and then reposted it as a 'closed' thread. Unconventional, and something that only a mod can do today, but I don't see why there couldn't be a forum where only the 'wiki team' has posting privileges.

The Customizations forum is 'supposed' to be only a listing of how-to's and not discussion. I'd argue for actually making that the case. We could just have a link in each post to a discussion thread in another forum.

Mustard

October 25th, 2005, 06:44 PM

The most compelling reason, in my opinion, for using the wiki over the forums is that a 'customisation thread' started by JoeBlow contributor can only be edited and maintained by JoeBlow contributor, who may or may not be around to edit the opening post, should new information be required.

Personally, as a wikipedia editor, I find the ubuntu wiki slow and unwieldy and uses an unfamiliar wiki markup language, is poorly indexed and does not have an intuitive main page that is inviting to the average user. I would be far more excited about using a more 'wikipedia style' environment because,

A) I know the markup language well.
B) It doesnt run like a turtle on sedatives, as this current wiki software seems to. :)

I like the idea presented here to have a discussion area in the forum, solely because of how slow the current wiki is to edit.

manicka

October 25th, 2005, 06:45 PM

This is a work in progress....

The forum administration has told me that they are working on some tools so that a forum-wiki team can better incorporate the wiki (or wiki content) into the forums and vice versa. This would apply to the other ubuntu (Kubuntuforums) forums, too so that there would not be fragmentation of effort.

We must wait....

Team Bahamut is working on something that isn't to far away from being announced.
It would be unfair to give out more details at this stage. Just be patient and all will be revealed :)

October 25th, 2005, 08:50 PM

I hear that, but that could also be resolved by having a read-only forum with pristine posts that have been culled from the other postings. I've gotten a little aggressive with my ATI how-to and used the forum to refine it and then reposted it as a 'closed' thread. Unconventional, and something that only a mod can do today, but I don't see why there couldn't be a forum where only the 'wiki team' has posting privileges.

Well, when I discussed the reported posts hack with Kassetra, I pointed out how users would appreciate to be able to follow their request through in the 'wiki team' forum. I never mentioned it being read-only. I guess she thought of that. That would be pretty limiting since the team would lose out on suggestions or alienate potential new team members.

As for the customisation section, that would only benefit the users who know about it. The wiki benefits the ubuntu community at large. The point is to share all the good stuff that is going on here in the forums.

mlomker

October 26th, 2005, 09:36 AM

I never mentioned it being read-only. I guess she thought of that. That would be pretty limiting since the team would lose out on suggestions or alienate potential new team members.

If that was previously discussed then it was before my time as a mod, so I wasn't privy to the conversation. Sorry to be rehashing here if that's the case.

As for the customisation section, that would only benefit the users who know about it. The wiki benefits the ubuntu community at large. The point is to share all the good stuff that is going on here in the forums.

How many people use the wiki that aren't on the forums? I haven't seen any hit count information. If the link to the wiki wasn't put on the top of the page then even fewer would know about it....a number of people that I have referred to the wiki had never heard of it.

I'm also concerned about the wiki be overgeneralized. There's Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, and probably others that I don't know about. How many how-to's are going to be universal among them?

As it is I put out ATI how-to's that work flawlessly on 32-bit KDE and then get barraged with odd errors specific to gnome or 64-bit that I'm then obligated to troubleshoot (even if I put **ONLY TESTED ON 32-BIT KDE** on top of the post).

October 26th, 2005, 08:17 PM

If that was previously discussed then it was before my time as a mod, so I wasn't privy to the conversation. Sorry to be rehashing here if that's the case..

I have been rehashing the issue that *everything* should be in public for a long time.... Nothing official is private in ubuntu proper - that's what attracts a lot of people from other distributions. It is a big point.

How many people use the wiki that aren't on the forums? I haven't seen any hit count information. If the link to the wiki wasn't put on the top of the page then even fewer would know about it....a number of people that I have referred to the wiki had never heard of it.

I'm also concerned about the wiki be overgeneralized. There's Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, and probably others that I don't know about. How many how-to's are going to be universal among them?

As it is I put out ATI how-to's that work flawlessly on 32-bit KDE and then get barraged with odd errors specific to gnome or 64-bit that I'm then obligated to troubleshoot (even if I put **ONLY TESTED ON 32-BIT KDE** on top of the post).

I think that most wiki pages are edited or created by people who have nothing to do with the forums. You see a lot of names from the mailing lists, to name one other place.

Those errors you get barraged with can get fixed on the spot by people who run Gnome or 64-bit. You did your part, now others build on your work. You can easily include information for other releases and arches on the same page - that is a style issue, nothing else.

ubuntu-geek

October 26th, 2005, 08:43 PM

Just a heads up to all of you guys.. This is the official notice the doc/wiki team created and is posted in the howto section..

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=82008

imagine

October 27th, 2005, 01:56 PM

I still haven't heard a compelling answer to my question, though: What makes the wiki a better solution than our current Customizations forums?
The wiki has a better name. I find "Customizations" misleading, since almost every forum on this board is about customizations. No matter if you change the look of your DE, solve a software or hardware problem, you always change something in the system.

Ok now to the in my opinion real (tm) disadvantages I see with the howto forum:
As Mustard already pointed out, a big problem with threads in the howto forum is that only very few persons can edit the first posting.
Someone writes a howto about how he set up something on his system. Then other users thank him, write down problems they encountered, point out errors in the howto, post solutions to earlier posted problems and so on. That way the howto is basically spread over lots of pages.
Even worse, every six months a new howto forum is set up. Some howtos are posted in all forums, some only in the new one, some only in some of the old ones, spreading the helpful postings concerning that howto even wider.

Of course the person who started a thread could update his first posting all the time. But this is most often not done and even if it is, it's inefficient. He would have to follow the discussion in the thread (and many other covering the same topic) over years, copy the helpful comments and insert them into his first posting, whereas in a wiki everybody could just directly edit the howto.

I hear that, but that could also be resolved by having a read-only forum with pristine posts that have been culled from the other postings.This is the worst solution IMHO. It would be very difficult to improve/correct/extend an existing howto. I'd like to repeat my opposite suggestion: Give the wiki a wikipedia style (syntax, UI elements) and give write access to everybody.

I hope this didn't sound too negative now. I like this forum, otherwise I wouldn't be here. But a forum is no replacement for a wiki, same as a wiki is no replacement for a forum. Some things can be better done in a forum, some in a wiki. And I think howtos are better accessible in the wiki than here.

mlomker

October 27th, 2005, 02:28 PM

over years, copy the helpful comments and insert them into his first posting, whereas in a wiki everybody could just directly edit the howto.

Over the years? How many how-to's are even relevant to the next version much less over the course of years? I've had to update my ATI how-to's every couple of days as new patches are released, Breezy is updated, and ATI releasing new drivers at their own whim.

Bottom line is that most how-to's have a shelf-life of 6 months (due to Ubuntu releases) and some are much shorter than that.

Some things can be better done in a forum, some in a wiki. And I think howtos are better accessible in the wiki than here.

I guess if it's in the wiki then it's Ubuntu documentation. I sure wouldn't want to feel obligated to support a how-to that has been edited by anyone.

October 27th, 2005, 02:46 PM

Over the years? How many how-to's are even relevant to the next version much less over the course of years? I've had to update my ATI how-to's every couple of days as new patches are released, Breezy is updated, and ATI releasing new drivers at their own whim.

Bottom line is that most how-to's have a shelf-life of 6 months (due to Ubuntu releases) and some are much shorter than that.

I guess if it's in the wiki then it's Ubuntu documentation. I sure wouldn't want to feel obligated to support a how-to that has been edited by anyone.

Which is why you need a wiki team to tend to the pages and make sure that the stuff is well organised, but still accessiblt (read and write) by everyone.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 01:53 PM

Hi all,

I saw this thread and thought it might be a good place to continue some of the dialogue that has been going on between the forums and the wiki in various parts of the forum.

I am concerned to get dialogue happening straight away because I noticed that a new wiki has been set up (running wikimedia) which appears to be intended to store documentation: the Ubuntu Document Storage Facility (http://doc.gwos.org/index.php/Main_Page). This wiki is maintained by Team Bahamut. It was announced on this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=85899).

There is obviously a lot of good energy going into this wiki, even though it is young. I want to ensure that this energy has the maximum possible benefit.

I think we can all agree on a couple of things:
1. There is good quality documentation around.
2. Users need to have resources in as few places as possible so that they can helpfully search and find good answers to their problems quickly.

For this reason, I believe that it is a bad idea to have more than one wiki. Apart from making users search in more than one place, it also means that great energy is being duplicated because two groups of people are doing the same things.

Whenever new initiatives spring up like this, I tell myself that the reason must be because the existing resources are not doing the job properly. Some reasons why have been identified on this thread. But these are all things we can work on and do something about! There is no doubt that those who work on the wiki care about making good quality documentation, and recognise problems that need to be addressed. For an example of this, see our spec on better wiki docs (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BetterWikiDocs).

I think we can work together to make the Ubuntu Wiki higher quality. I think that the problems pointed out in this thread (and others) can be addressed within the current infrastructure without making new wikis and new websites with documentation, and making users' lives a bit harder.

One obvious problem is the ability of people to get involved with the wiki. We are trying hard to address this. Here is the thread I posted about how to get involved on the wiki (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=81999). Please read it!

As for registering, all you need is a Launchpad (https://launchpad.net) account, which governs all Ubuntu websites (the forum is the only one which uses a different account, and as Azz pointed out, hopefully this will change).

In sum, let's collaborate and work together to make Ubuntu documentation REALLY USEFUL!

Thanks for reading.

Matt

November 10th, 2005, 02:49 PM

Whenever new initiatives spring up like this, I tell myself that the reason must be because the existing resources are not doing the job properly. Some reasons why have been identified on this thread.
If the reason has anything to do with the relationship between the forum staff and myself, let me know and I will get out of your way.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 02:54 PM

If the reason has anything to do with the relationship between the forum staff and myself, let me know and I will get out of your way.

I know nothing of this, as far as I know anything between you and them has nothing to do with this!

All I am saying is that frequently new initiatives spring up, because the existing ones are not good enough. I always think the best solution is to make the existing ones better!!

panickedthumb

November 10th, 2005, 03:01 PM

I don't think that's the case here. The Wiki is fantastic, and I don't know why anyone would make a new wiki instead of making their own section on the existing wiki. The thing about wiki's: If they aren't working, change or add content so that it does work.

I guess we should wait to hear from Team Bahamut on why there's a new wiki, but I don't think it's because of a downfall of the wiki proper.

November 10th, 2005, 03:01 PM

I know nothing of this, as far as I know anything between you and them has nothing to do with this!

I was addressing the forum staff. Great strides were being made at one time that were interrupted by the complaint...

panickedthumb

November 10th, 2005, 03:12 PM

I was addressing the forum staff. Great strides were being made at one time that were interrupted by the complaint...
you were responsible for many of those strides yourself.

ubuntu-geek

November 10th, 2005, 03:15 PM

I was addressing the forum staff. Great strides were being made at one time that were interrupted by the complaint...
And great strides are still being made.. For example, Myself and Jeff W. spend time yesterday working on the fridge integration with the forums there is now a simple API for this that needs to be tested also there is now an API for user account creation that can be used to integrate with the LP/wiki and I am awaiting a reply from spiv on this.

Again, I and I cant say this enough. If you are not involved in getting these processes setup its best to sit back and enjoy the forums until bugs are worked out.

As far as the wiki from team bah, I'll let them comment on it ..

ubuntu-geek

November 10th, 2005, 03:19 PM

If the reason has anything to do with the relationship between the forum staff and myself, let me know and I will get out of your way.
I'd say lay cool for awhile azz.. I respect you but just chill and things will happen.. :)

November 10th, 2005, 03:22 PM

I'd say lay cool for awhile azz.. I respect you but just chill and things will happen.. :)
I completely understand.

And I noticed the fridge threads yesterday. Kudos!

ubuntu-geek

November 10th, 2005, 03:34 PM

I completely understand.

And I noticed the fridge threads yesterday. Kudos!
Yeah I noticed you made a comment :) Hopefully we'll get all the bugs ironed out soon..

KingBahamut

November 10th, 2005, 04:42 PM

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 04:49 PM

My Concerns with this, and ultimately the issue before, was a severe Miscommunication between myself , fellow team mate Steve Myers, and the Wiki Doc team where it was stated that Information from the Forums was considered unreliable.
ok let's sort this out.

Yes, we had an issue with Steve (not related to reliability of material from the forum). A few of us (me included) attempted to establish communication by leaving messages on Steve's wiki homepage and I emailed him via the forum, but we had no response and our messages were deleted. What we are talking about here is not a miscommunication, but a complete absence of communication.

The problem was not reliability of material, and could easily have been sorted out with a few emails.

Do you mean to say that you started a new wiki, because of that?

Please please please, let's discuss the matter and pool efforts.

Matt

KingBahamut

November 10th, 2005, 04:54 PM

Pool the effort?

The data is there, Take it.

Why should it be a concern about where the documentation comes from. Or when and where a user relies on that documenation. For that matter it sounds a lot more like centralization of effort than it does like a gathering of resources.

That wiki is where is it , and its staying there.

My Team members draw information they consider reliable from the forum and put it there.

If you consider it as reliable, take it.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 04:57 PM

Ok, I'm not going to bang my head against a brick wall, so I'll end it here.

However, you mentioned centralisation as if it was a bad thing: it is a good thing, because users can search one site. If they have to look in two, or three, or four places for a guide, it will take them longer, and they will give up.

Then we've failed before we've started.

KingBahamut

November 10th, 2005, 04:59 PM

That sounds far more defeatist than it does openness.

Rather an All Eyes will be on Arrakis concept.

Searching a wiki, specially for keywords can be messy and unhappy. A newbie user comes into that, youll cause them frustration and irritation.

Not to scare anyone away by that, but at least try to create an envoirnment that is if anything Ergonomic to the user.

Does that mean you will as well kill the forums? Ubuntuguide.org? other forms of communication in favor of your own. That doesnt speak any volume of Humanism to me, and surely Voltaire himself would scoff at it.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 05:09 PM

That sounds far more defeatist than it does openness.

No, I'm not being defeatist, I am proactively trying to open dialogue to make the user experience better.

Searching a wiki, specially for keywords can be messy and unhappy. A newbie user comes into that, youll cause them frustration and irritation.

We CAN and WILL make this better, as I said in post 25 to this thread. Making a SECOND wiki doesn't really help the user.

Does that mean you will as well kill the forums? Ubuntuguide.org? other forms of communication in favor of your own. That doesnt speak any volume of Humanism to me, and surely Voltaire himself would scoff at it.

This is not a freedom issue, this is a user experience issue.

The forums are a completely different means of communication (as are mailing lists) and as such are totally invaluable. As for ubuntuguide.org, yes I believe it is duplicate effort, I've expressed my views on that elsewhere.

I am in favour of have different forms of communication available, but against having multiple versions of the same form. I believe that my proposal was PRO-openness because I am seeking to collaborate, rather than fork efforts.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 05:10 PM

based on the conversation in this thread:
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=81205

I would like to request a forum for the purpose of allowing people to post wiki pages that need to be imporved, and generate some discussion about what could be in them.

Returning to the original topic of this thread: we have implemented a way of doing this:

Wiki pages that need improvement should be marked "CategoryCleanup" (just edit the page and select that from the drop down box at the bottom, if the page isn't already in that Category). That means that people interested in wiki work have a place to start! https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CategoryCleanup

General todo page is here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WikiToDo

If you'd like to discuss any pages on the wiki, please feel free to email the Ubuntu Documentation Team here: http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-doc

I've nothing against a forum for discussion, but it would be a bit of extra work to follow that as well as the mailing list. But, if you set one up, please let us know too!

Thanks for your ideas, and keep helping to bring the wiki closer to users: it is a definite problem that we can improve.

Matt

KingBahamut

November 10th, 2005, 05:18 PM

Regardless , Matthew, Im here for one reason and one reason only. To Support the User. Im not here for Marketing or for any other purpose around getting the word out to other users, other than the own words from my own mouth.

If a user comes to me, I want to point them in the right direction. That direction does not have to be defined by anything. As long as the user has options and choice. Options. Choice.

While I admire your ability to want to pool together all of our efforts, to say that duplicated efforts are useless (based on your prior communications) is if anything elitist in my opinion. Are you telling me that the Doc Facility should go down because it counters your own intents? Because it gives the user an alternative? What if the user finds it desireable? What if the user doesnt prefer your vision? What if your vision never comes to something the user desires? Your asking to take away Choice. That , Mon Ami, I cannot support.

The Documentation is there Mr. East.

We exist in this situation for the user. Support and acceptance of the user. No other reason is why we are here. We arent here for freedom of Speech, we arent a marketing tool, we arent something to be ignored. We exist as a support base for the user. The user has problems, they come to us and they ask. The moument, the very second, that you take the choice of the user away, you cease to deny the ability of the user to do what it wants. Choose which way best suits itself.

For future Reference, Mr. East, its Bill. Bill Weber. Only my friends get to call me KB.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 05:20 PM

Ok i can see we're not going to agree, and that is fine. I just wanted to try some dialogue. One thing I found a bit strange:

[...]
Mon Ami
[...]
For future Reference, Mr. East, its Bill. Bill Weber. Only my friends get to call me KB.

jnoreiko

November 10th, 2005, 05:25 PM

Users like to have one authoritative place to look for documentation.

If Ubuntu's documentation were a site with limited write access, you might havea point in saying you want to go your own way. But forking a wiki, unless you have some major disagreement to do with the way the documentation is presented, doesn't seem very useful or wise to me.

You're duplicating the effort put into making good documentation: everything will have to be written twice or at least copied across for your User's Choice to be meaningful.

KingBahamut

November 10th, 2005, 05:30 PM

You can take it as you like it.

When I was brought into this conversation, I was asked my opinion, only to be told my efforts are useless and/or mis-directed.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 05:32 PM

You can take it as you like it.

When I was brought into this conversation, I was asked my opinion, only to be told my efforts are useless and/or mis-directed.
I did not say that, at any stage in the conversation. I am just trying to build some bridges, help the documentation improve, and assist users in finding it.

KingBahamut

November 10th, 2005, 05:38 PM

However, you mentioned centralisation as if it was a bad thing: it is a good thing, because users can search one site. If they have to look in two, or three, or four places for a guide, it will take them longer, and they will give up.

As for ubuntuguide.org, yes I believe it is duplicate effort, I've expressed my views on that elsewhere.

By Saying duplicated you might as well say useless or mis-directed. By that rationale I am not contributing in the proper manner, yes?

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 05:44 PM

As for ubuntuguide.org, yes I believe it is duplicate effort, I've expressed my views on that elsewhere.

By Saying duplicated you might as well say useless or mis-directed. By that rationale I am not contributing in the proper manner, yes?
No. Everything I say, you are taking personally: it is not meant as such. My point is not that your contributions (and others contributing to these resources) lack value, in fact I have specifically said that they are valuable, and that enthusiasm like this is an advantage to the community. However I do believe that it is a shame if two groups of people, both with enthusiasm, working on two projects which are substantially the same, can't work together to create one excellent resource.

I am not going to press the matter, but I'd like to end the thread by at least clarifying any misunderstandings and agreeing to disagree. There is no need for this to be an argument, rather than a profitable discussion.

Matt

jnoreiko

November 10th, 2005, 05:45 PM

By Saying duplicated you might as well say useless or mis-directed. By that rationale I am not contributing in the proper manner, yes?

Somewhat, yes.
The Ubuntu wiki has a number of problems that need to be fixed, and I can see why setting up a whole new wiki could seem like a good idea in the short term.

The speed at which pages are saved seems to have vastly improved, so that's one less thing. :)
I think the MediaWiki software is far superior to what the ubuntu wiki is currently using. The markup is easier to use and more intuitive (plus it's also used by the largest wikis in existence, which means many people already know it). Furthermore, it allows images to be uploaded, which means we could add screenshots.

Perhaps your wiki will convince the ubuntu wiki team to convert to MediaWiki?
In which case I do not think your work will have been useless, far from it :)

KingBahamut

November 10th, 2005, 05:47 PM

Appreciation is a wonderful thing: It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well.

I can admire your statement jnoreiko.

ubuntu-geek

November 10th, 2005, 06:01 PM

Ok, so I thought I would step in a make a few comments a second before taking the long drive home. I don't want to choose sides as I feel we all need to work together to make this more efficient, this issue has been long standing and needs to be fixed.

I really want everyone to come to a happy medium here and for both parties to find a creative way of porting forum information. Maybe the doc site Bill has setup is a good start for something the ubuntu doc team can use to port over information that is clean and professional looking I'm not sure just an idea. Maybe something similiar to the doc site can be setup on the main ubuntu wiki and bills team can maintain it.. Just some thoughts I have..

I'd like to try and steer this into a more professional conversation instead of a personal one..

I have to run for now..

panickedthumb

November 10th, 2005, 06:04 PM

I think that making KB a maintainer of a subsection of the wiki is the best way to go. That way there's only one place to search.

darkmatter

November 10th, 2005, 06:06 PM

The point is that the wiki needs serious improving, and the user doesn't have to wait, doesn't need to wait for the information to be presented in the manner that he/she desires. That causes the average user an undo amount of frustration...

http://doc.gwos.org/ was established to answer directly to the needs of the users as presented on the forums, and some have already expressed their thanks as to it being a valuable resource.

To state that it is a duplicate effort, well...I can understand your opinions, but to the user it is not. We simply present the information they need in the manner they desire.

It has been stated here that decentralized documentation confuses the user.

Speaking as a someone who was 'green' once, I happen to disagree. As long as the documentation in question is kept well organized and concise, it can be more benificial than a single resource, at least in regard to the situation at hand.

This is not meant as a disagreement with the doc teams concerns...but even you must agree that, at the moment, the structure of the official wiki is somewhat...lacking.

As KB (Bill) stated, if you feel the need to use it as a reference, or as a resource pool...so be it.

I am all for a joint effort, as long as both parties get the respect and recognition the deserve.

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 06:10 PM

I think that making KB a maintainer of a subsection of the wiki is the best way to go. That way there's only one place to search.
We don't have wiki maintainers, and there is no possibility of granting control of sections to particular groups or users on the current wiki: access control is not enabled, and all users can edit all the pages.

On the other hand, there have been several attempts to make the wiki and the forums closer together, and we have worked together with Ryan to do this. See this post (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=81999), and on the wiki:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/WikiGuide
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/forum

Bill and his team could be a real asset to the wiki, we just need to get some mutual communication going. We would be happy to have input and discussion on the documentation team mailing list (http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-doc)

Matt

panickedthumb

November 10th, 2005, 06:14 PM

mattheweast

November 10th, 2005, 06:21 PM

"We don't have wiki maintainers, and there is no possibility of granting control of sections to particular groups or users on the current wiki: access control is not enabled, and all users can edit all the pages."

Sorry, that was poorly worded. What I mean is having him set up a chunk of the wiki and he and his team can maintain it. A "maintainer" position wasn't what I meant really, as I know they don't exist.

Obviously having the extra help of the other wiki members would help as well
Sure, this is the idea of the forum section (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/forum). But once documents are ready, there is no reason to keep them in a separate section, they should be part of the main wiki and available for users to view from the index at the UserDocumentation (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UserDocumentation) page.

Matt

Henrik

November 10th, 2005, 06:50 PM

I'm the Ubuntu wiki admin. I have run several MediaWikis and Moin wikis and would claim that both systems have their strengths. Keeping the information in two separate markups does cause some problems for moving information around though. We are currently working on a new wiki skin that will allow the wiki to appear as a website, so any documentation contained in it can be well presented and easy to navigate. See: http://69.60.114.106/

If someone wants to set up a moin-format wiki or a section of a wiki for the purpose of wiki-fying forum-based information I'd be happy to provide server space and to work on making a tight integration and work from with the existing wiki, the website and the help.ubuntu.com site. Bill, I'd be happy for you to lead this effort if you want.

jsgotangco

November 10th, 2005, 08:35 PM

I'd advise to grab Henrik's suggestion as well. We currently have enough server space that can easily grow as needed.

robstoffers

November 11th, 2005, 02:22 AM