Blaise Pabon kirjoitti 25.11.2021 klo 5.43:
I appreciate all the constructive suggestions, particularly those that acknowledge the, uh , inconsistencies in the documentation.
(snip)
Regarding the docs, yes the older ones are more useful. IMHO, it would be better for the new docs to paint a more realistic picture of the process so that newbies don't feel like there is something wrong with them for not figuring it out. I'm busy trying to find a job right now, so I don't expect that I'll be able to do much wordsmithing until I have a source of income.
When the docs were migrated, the intent was, of course, to make them better, not worse. If things have regressed in some way, I would like to fix them. Could you be more specific, in what ways the new docs less useful? Is there some particular content in the retired wiki pages that is not available at docs.fp.o, or what is the problem?
Also, could you elaborate a bit, in what ways the current docs are unrealistic? I would like to make them more realistic.
Looking at the current state, one thing I notice it that currently, the "Joining the Package Maintainers" page barely mentions sponsorship. This is fallout from trying to make that page sound less like you have to submit a new package to join, previously it was discussed in the "Adding a new package" section, which is now a separate page. I will add a note with a link in the Joining page summary, so that part is clear from the outset.
Otto _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
