On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Karanbir Singh wrote: > The sheer existence of this stale content on the wiki today, > makes me and other people think that the idea of moving > content isn't going to work at all. It's too short sighted, > ill-conceived and badly implemented. yup, probably won't work well, [GI => GO] but perhaps we can 'enhance' piecewise the wiki without major effort (and I don't like wikis nor forums, but I grit my teeth) -- Two responses here: 1. I've always considered wiki like a mass of stringy spaghetti -- easy enough to boil, but an unappealing snake nest when it cools; That said, there are some pages which I watch and edit as the muse strikes, or as I see an EASYFIX That said, I at least read in my RSS feed the wiki change diff on each edit, and do spot fixes when I see stuff that needs it. The hope I have is that perhaps the google crawl of it makes it of some use on a fulltext search limited to site:centos.org 2. I think there is a maintainer oriented report of broken links, and aged (oldest to newer) list of the time of last page edit --- perhaps a protocol of working that list, and adding a visible: last checked: 081112 herrold at the bottom (to get it to the head of that list), would 'turn over the soil' on the whole wiki sequentially, and let us 'weed' it collaboratively in small stages -- doable. Ralph: any pointers? > There are things that the wiki is good for like howto's and > info on specific issues are really well done, but some > fringe content where individual authors were driving stuff > forward, and no longer are - seems to have just falled > wayside. and pruning or splitting off the dead or unmaintainable content (that d*mn ever changing jpackage Java section comes to mind) off into an 'unmaintained' branch, or killing it outright and fixing resultant broken links, is about all we can do there. -- Russ herrold
