On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Venkatraman S <venka...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Tom Evans <tevans...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> Thinking 'but we can make our own Q&A site' is foolish. See Jeff >> Attwood's post on the same subject: > > I wouldnt do this and am in no way going to be doing this. Instead, i am > suggesting an ArticleBase. > > >> >> OP: >> Noble aims. How do you aim to achieve 'highly curated' articles and >> snippets? >> One of the principle problems with djangosnippets is that the snippets >> often tend to work only at the version of django the user developed >> them at. >> Do you intend to revalidate every article and snippet on every django >> release? >> How will you do that, will each snippet/article be required to have >> testcases? >> Who will write the testcases? >> Will you validate against latest current release, or a variety of >> releases? > > All the release information and etc etc will be mentioned clearly. What is > supported and what not. > I will try to write up a sample article on this and share to give you a > flavour of what i have in mind. > > Who will write? Good q - anyone. But for it to appear in the article base, > it has to be approved - the article should > contain all the relevant information. Think in terms of wikibase for django > tips/tricks/articles. ONE place. > > Though, I would still like this to be part of the djangoproject article > storehouse than we hosting this independently.
Elaborating on Tom's comments, I would point out the following: * We already have a wiki that supports prose text, code snippets, search and versioning. * We already have documentation, which is curated, and also has an open policy of accepting new contributions. This isn't a technical problem. It's a resource problem. Writing good documentation is hard. This is a volunteer project, so we can't compel anyone to curate anything (or do anything else for that matter). I put it to you that developing an ArticleBase would be putting the cart before the horse. The articles need to come *first*, and they could be happily hosted on the wiki. Developing a massive warehouse before you have something to put in it is getting the priorities completely bass ackwards. Once there's a solid collection of articles, and evidence that the wiki isn't providing all the features that are needed, *then* it's worth developing an improved document store. And *if* we get to that point, you can count on the support of the core team and the DSF to get you whatever resources you need. So -- my humble suggestion: If you think there is a need for improving Django documentation, I wholeheartedly agree. There's plenty of room for improvement in Django's docs. But the place to start isn't to write a massive technical site to host new documentation. You start by *writing documentation*. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
