On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Brian Mathis wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:45 PM, R P Herrold <herrold at centos.org> wrote:
>> herrold:
>> because creating a problem and fixing it ex post is harder
>> than not creating it in the first place
> Spam issues aside, that is the very concept of Wikipedia and other
> wikis, and also for all modern VCS tools, and most of them have proven
> that line of thinking really doesn't hold up.
That's clearly one opinion but not stats based that I can see
-- it is not observationally true that I can see
-- As a counter example, recall a wiki entry I saw on the
Wikipedia declaring Mike Harris [the upstream's long time X
maintainer] to be the 42nd Emperor of Ontario
snip more theory
> ... As soon as it's open, you'll have more people
> monitoring and more people who can fix errors as they are
> introduced.
I'm one of the ones reading all commits and doing rough cut
triage, and the theory you put forth is not the reality I see,
even with the present 'find and ask model'
Check out the created and abandoned xen articles in our wiki
-- who cares enough to stop writing new pages and complete
fixups? The ML pre-vetting is a talkers debating society by
and large, from what I see in commits. ;)
As I suggest: If it is not core variances, it goes to
'projects' wiki, and I'll ignore it and whatever else the cat
drags in (with an appropriate subscription rule) so long as it
has a warning sign for the unwary
my $0.02
- Russ herrold
