Have to fully agree with Adrien, but just to clarify our intentions:
We wish to sort the wiki in a way that is easier to find information on given matters for
users who are struggling with a problem or just generally wish to find information on a
topic or on openSUSE.
This project is not about excluding other platforms where contribution is currently
This project is not about gatekeeping.
This project is not about control or setting limitations on contributors.
This project is not about "questioning openSUSE's guiding principles".
This project is purely about knowledge sharing and encouraging new users to openSUSE to
learn, find out more about openSUSE and maybe later down the road contribute to the
project in some form if they feel like it.
So if you read 3 minutes into the backlog you'll
see that "Protect" in
the context has nothing to do with dogma or exclusion or control, but
on the contrary was about propagating up-to-date information and
empirically tested good practices.
We've already established with Adrien a point in our list which calls for
"Collectors" who are collecting issues and materials from all the places where
discussions happening what we can work with. This assumes that we can map these places
So if you're a contributor who is documenting on X platform that's fine. Nobody
will force you into doing anything that you don't want to or using a platform or
format you don't feel comfortable with. Drop a link to your documentation(s) so we
can include it in form of a link at least. Life goes on, business as usual.
Furthermore, what we settled on during our first meeting with Lana and Frank is to turn
into a hub from where the current documentations will be accessible in
their current format and will link to certain topics - like FAQ - on en.opensuse.org
We're more than happy to hear other suggestions, however, considering that the
Welcome app is pointing to doc.opensuse.org
seems like a reasonable decision.
The goal is simple: lower the barrier of entry, make documentations easier to find by
making them available on en.opensuse.org
in collaboration with the
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Friday, October 16, 2020 7:06 AM, Adrien Glauser <adrien.glauser(a)gmail.com>
> > I have to agree with Lars on this topic.
> > "Protect" sounds to me like
> And that's where the discussion went bankrupt, where the topic was
> shifted to how someone felt about a word when instead there was a
> precise definition of what the word meant, and a concrete context
> against which that definition was illustrated. Perhaps I am the one to
> fault for this as I've been quite long winded on this topic.
> So if you read 3 minutes into the backlog you'll see that
> the context has nothing to do with dogma or exclusion or control, but
> on the contrary was about propagating up-to-date information and
> empirically tested good practices.
> Anyway, I have little interest in building a theory of learning in the
> FOSS environment, let alone defending it on this ML. Just wanted to
> keep people in the loop. I will continue to do so, but at the end of
> the day, only concrete results matter. Anyone here will have plenty of
> time to make constructive criticisms of every aspect and detail of the
> results, and I have no reason to doubt that we will try our best to
> honour them.
> See ya later
> the team wants to artifically limit me (as
> > a contributor) on which platforms I can use to engage with other
> > openSUSE contributors and define exactly where I must go if I wish to
> > provide information to openSUSE users.
> > I assure you, if that is the case, then I will cease contributing to
> > any "official" openSUSE documentation platform and only
> > information via platforms of my own control.
> > Like Lars says, we're a diverse bunch, and respecting that
> > a key value of the openSUSE's guiding principles.
> > I do hope I have misunderstood what you mean by "Protect", but
> > have not, then I hope I make it very clear where I stand on the matter.
> > > Le mercredi 14 octobre 2020 à 16:22 +0200, Lars Vogdt a écrit
> > >
> > > > Am 2020-10-14 15:11, schrieb Adrien Glauser:
> > > >
> > > > > My beef with it is that it kinda assumes that
we want to
> > > > > accept the status quo with the current level
> > > > > support
> > > > > material, while this "refreshing the
learning experience" is
> > > > > about
> > > > > challenging the status quo. To be clear, we
are talking about two
> > > > > strategies:
> > > > > (Repair) Bite the bullet about fragmentation,
make or customize a
> > > > > search engine able to fight fragmentation
after the facts, so
> > > > > that
> > > > > support material is dynamically aggregated.
> > > > > (Protect) Refuse to bite the bullet, prevent
fragmentation in the
> > > > > first
> > > > > place by collecting information into a static
(yet easy to
> > > > > maintain)
> > > > > single "source of truth & best
practices", and then hope it
> > > > > irrigates
> > > > > all platforms.
> > > >
> > > > I have to admit that I really like your enthusiasm and
> > > > project
> > > > all the best!
> > > > I just fear that "Repair" is the only
realistic option, especially
> > > > long
> > > > term.
> > > > Why? We are an open source project with a lot of
> > > > to
> > > > work on their areas of interest. Often enough these
> > > > very
> > > > interesting and useful stuff, but the results could -
at least in
> > > > the
> > > > beginning - not be integrated under your
> > > > (mostly
> > > > because of resource or time restrictions). You can
decide to loose
> > > > some
> > > > of these projects because of your restrictions, but
I'm not sure if
> > > > this
> > > > is a good idea.
> > > > We are diverse. Everyone has different opinions and
> > > > favorite
> > > > tools. Trying to press everyone into the same tooling
will not help
> > > > to
> > > > get more volunteers. I even tend to say that people
> > > > content in "their" tool in the past will
neither spent their
> > > > current
> > > > time to migrate their content nor will they update
their parts in
> > > > the
> > > > new setup later.
> > > > I have seen this in the past with the "wiki
migration". A lot of
> > > > people
> > > > stopped their voluntary contributions once others
> > > > they
> > > > have to move and refresh their provided content in the
> > > > pages.
> > > > Since than, for me, it's clear that forcing
volunteers to re-do
> > > > their
> > > > former work is a way to push good contributors out of
> > > > And as I said before: so far I see the reason behind
each tool that
> > > > we
> > > > (as openSUSE community) provide to our
"customers". What I miss on
> > > > the
> > > > other side is kind of a portal (page) that helps
> > > > identify
> > > > these tools and ways to collaborate and contribute.
And I miss -
> > > > like
> > > > you - volunteers that review the existing content.
> > > >
> > > > > About your other point about the tools that
> > > > > platforms
> > > > > provide, is there an up-to-date list of every
single tool hosted
> > > > > by
> > > > > openSUSE? Yes I am being lazy, but better
being lazy than risking
> > > > > overlooking things.
> > > >
> > > > For projects hosted and maintained in the openSUSE
> > > > includes infrastructure provided by the heroes as well
> > > > powered
> > > > stuff) I suggest to look at:
> > > > https://status.opensuse.org/
> > > > ...and if you click on the icon in the upper right
corner of that
> > > > page,
> > > > you should get a cool overview of all currently known
> > > > related
> > > > stuff.
> > > > With kind regards,
> > > > Lars
> > --
> > Richard Brown
> > Linux Distribution Engineer - Future Technology Team
> > Phone +4991174053-361
> > SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409
> > Nuernberg
> > (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
> > Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-doc+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
> To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-doc+owner(a)opensuse.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-doc+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-doc+owner(a)opensuse.org