On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 07:49:30PM -0600, Rajko wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:35:59 +0100 Andreas Jaeger
wrote: On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 19:39:58 Rajko wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 11:05:24 +0100 ... But we could change that, couldn't we?
Yes, if there is volunteer to visit all pages, so that navigation is still in tact.
Hi Rajko, thanks for a notice - I will take this into the account!
... Guidelines are subset of documentation and that is subset of packaging.
I don't see the difference than between Packaging and Packaging_documentation.
I would categorize guidelines and documentation as follows: Guidelines is the law - you shall do it this way documentation is the interpretation: Tips, tricks, howtos
Guidelines are bylaws; in essence mandatory instructions how to do something. Tips, tricks, howtos, are not mandatory, but with guidelines they make documentation, in this case for packaging.
Scripts are gray zone, while they can be included in any other form of documents, it would be nice to have them tagged with another category, have them on separate pages (protection and revision history), and when practical transcluded into other articles. We don't use this very much, but rather put scripts in a version control, or keep at home computer, far from users that should be aware of them.
As of right now difference is small, as Guidelines are major portion of documentation, and as we have no habit to publish example scripts in the wiki, there is almost nothing else that will go in packaging category except Portal:Packaging.
Yes, we should define what exactly should be used,
* Packaging - as common category and catch it all for cases where author doesn't know where to put a new article. ** Packaging_documentation for all documents sans scripts, images, lists images. ** Packaging_guidelines - for mandatory part. ** Packaging_howtos - for non-mandatory howtos, tips, tricks ** Packaging_scripts - for scripts that one can copy and paste ** Packaging_images - for article decoration, logos and flow diagrams ** Packaging_lists - for package lists as in packages to drop, to include, for sale, maintainers, minimum maintenance, need an expert, etc.
not sure if that's a joke, or not A personal note: I would say one of the problem in openSUSE is that we are overcategorized*. I don't know if that has a cultural background, or not. My feeling is that we should accept some fuziness of the reality and don't try to organize everything. In most of the cases it's pointless * examples are RPM Groups, number of mailinglists (shouldn't be this one discussed at opensuse-wiki instead?), or my favourite one - the number of devel projects in a buildservice So unless you're voluntering to make those categories up to date in a wiki, my approach is worse is better. IOW less categories are better than more, so I see only three possible candidates Category:Packaging - the most general one Category:Packaging_guidelines - those are reviewed and are mandatory Category:Packaging_guidelines_$drafts - those are requested, but not reviewed But for myself the third one is pointless - having the temporary category is not that usefull.
Example of list is what Christian Morales Vega is publishing on mail list as a Factory Status, and it could be published semi automaticly in the wiki, and with some imagination it can be made easy to make it click to mail, click to add name, click to jump to OBS and so on.
In other words with little effort we can make wiki central hub for part of textual and visual information that doesn't fit other venues, or that is too far from contributor's attention when elsewhere.
I am not sure I understood - my motivation behind Categories is that I run a script pull everything from defined category, add it to git repo and once a month I can generate a diff shows me, what have happened to write a report. If you're asking for making wiki pages with Factory statuses or so, this is probably offtopic here. But I'm sure those pages can be under Category:Packaging ;-) Regards Michal Vyskocil