On 9 March 2016 at 12:24, Dylan Combs <dylan.combs@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Is there something wrong with a moderated wiki that I'm missing? Sorry - I > don't mean to be a pest here, and I had kinda given up on the thread, but > it's still kickin', it seems. > > A git workflow doesn't strike me as as bad, necessarily, but man it's gotta > be incredibly simple and obvious how to participate. If it's simply: > > 1) Sign up for an account / Log in > 2) Use a browser to navigate to the page/section in need of modification. > 3) Press a button to enter composition mode in the browser. > 4) Write content in the browser. > 5) Press a button to submit pull request from the browser. > > Then it seems right to me. In fact, a git style system would probably > provide a nice way to share logins with ask.fedoraproject and/or karma, > badges, and awards for content (which I think is crucial for elevating user > privileges based on merit and whatnot). If it's more complicated than the > above, I'm back to the moderated wiki suggestion. If there's a client-side > application involved that isn't the browser and is somehow so simple and > accessible that it can't possibly be a barrier to entry, that'd probably be > ok, too. > As a point of information, that's pretty much github's editing of markdown files, though generally you need to 1.5) Create your own fork. When saving you have the options: Commit directly to the master branch Create a new branch for this commit and start a pull request. (Learn more about pull requests.) I've just tried on a local gitlab install and it similarly offers to create merge requests if editing a fork (but it doesn't have github's wysiwyg markdown editing, just raw text, maybe there's a plugin). -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk -- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
