Le 15 juillet 2023 23:00:43 GMT+02:00, MSavoritias <em...@msavoritias.me> a 
écrit :
>
>Attila Lendvai <att...@lendvai.name> writes:
>
>>> Regarding the forum I dont think any forum would have much traction.
>>> I agree that either matrix or xmpp could be considered instead for that
>>> purpose.
>>> As a more approachable chat mechanism compared to IRC.
>>
>>
>> it's an essential role of a forum that latecomers find the earlier
>> questions/discussions, typically through a websearch. a forum's
>> primary user-story is very much not that of a chat, i.e. a real-time,
>> ephemeral, linear flow of text, sometimes with multiple overlapping
>> discussions, and as such not very well processed by the search engine
>> crawlers...
>>
>> i think it all boils down to this:
>>
>> mailing list archives (and IRC logs) are stuck in time. their underlying 
>> data model is inadequate for efficient indexing/searching, and often lack 
>> structure even to conveniently present the archive to the user.
>
>Good point.
>My thinking is that next we miss too things for that:
>
>1. Easy search and indexing of our docs. Which already exists for the
>most part. Searching for occurunces of words like grep or a full blown
>wiki like gentoo or arch would be an interesting future approach.
>2. We need something easier than gnu info to contribute docs. As I have
>read a lot in irc for it to be a barrier. And personally its one of the
>main reasons i havent contributed yet. That I need time to learn
>it. That and I can't easily change or add Docs. I have to do pull
>requests and such.

At least for the cookbook, we can accept other formats, and a commiter will 
convert to the proper info format. What matters is the content, and you don't 
even have to create a patch, just send a chapter to the ML :)

>
>Thats why I was also aggreeing with Sourcehut in the other email. (Which
>already has guix ci support.) Guix would benefit from less NIH imo. At
>least in places where there already better solutions.
>
>Msavoritias
>
>> -- 
>> • attila lendvai
>> • PGP: 963F 5D5F 45C7 DFCD 0A39
>
>

Reply via email to