Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Pulse Audio Wiki Page

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    North West England
    Beans
    2,674
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Post Pulse Audio Wiki Page

    Hi good people,

    I referred a person having problems to the https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PulseAudio page and asked them to carry out the instructions listed as

    Code:
    sudo apt-get install libasound2-plugins "pulseaudio-*" paman padevchooser paprefs pavucontrol pavumeter
    and it gave errors, such as
    Code:
    Package padevchooser is not available
    Could someone please have a review of that page and update the commands.

    Regards,

    Phill.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Beans
    11,536

    Re: Pulse Audio Wiki Page

    I once envisioned moving that page to 'Pulseaudio_old" and starting a new one. I don't know, I feel like I know just enough about pulseaudio to be dangerous (I don't use Pulse on my my main install). I guess whatever page I make can't be worse than the current one, which was good in its day, but a lot of the information commands don't work, or worse, cause borkage in modern setups.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    North West England
    Beans
    2,674
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Post Re: Pulse Audio Wiki Page

    I have asked for a new tag to be be available for wiki pages that have information that is found not to be fully up to date.

    For those who keep the areas of FAQ up to date, I ask that someone does pay attention to that page. It is the wonderful system:

    A Job needed doing...
    Anyone could have done it...
    Everyone thought some that some one had done it...
    No one did it.

    In the meantime, can I ask this team to bear in mind the on going conversation...


    Obviously we want to avoid creating new tags if there is an existing one that is "good enough" already but sometimes it is unavoidable.

    I think it might be best to keep the tag as generic as possible so i think that instead of stating that the content is definitely out-of-date it might be better to say the content "may" be out-of-date. Then it's easier to use it without having to look to closely and leave it to page editors and users to decide if the tag is really justified or not, or just fix any trivial issues that may have prompted the use of the tag on a largely fine page. It also means people can just dump the tag on pages without it being such a big deal and users wont panic so much when they see it.

    So, perhaps "This page may need updating" in a nice amber, yellow, orange or tan? Enough to make people a little wary and make editors jump up and edit out of sheer pride in their page?
    I think he has a good point, we are all fierce to the wiki areas we look after. But an easily searchable tag that can be applied in instances when an OP says it give me an error would be of help.

    Regards,

    Phill.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •