From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 13 09:35:08 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: doc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D5716A403; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 09:35:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from chipmunk.ai.net (axe.ai.net [205.134.161.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D1A413C44C; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 09:35:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (net-ix.gw.ai.net [205.134.160.6] (may be forged)) by chipmunk.ai.net (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id l0D92Q9d065629; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 04:02:26 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 04:02:12 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes To: Joel Dahl Message-Id: <20070113040212.4f9b8b69.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <1168633900.1082.38.camel@jesus.automatvapen.se> References: <1168562996.1100.42.camel@jesus.automatvapen.se> <20070112.201104.113738010.hrs@allbsd.org> <1168633900.1082.38.camel@jesus.automatvapen.se> Organization: The FreeBSD Project X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.6 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hrs@FreeBSD.org, doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: The end of the contributors article X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 09:35:08 -0000 On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:31:39 +0100 Joel Dahl wrote: > Fre 2007-01-12 klockan 20:11 +0900 skrev Hiroki Sato: > > Joel Dahl wrote > > in <1168562996.1100.42.camel@jesus.automatvapen.se>: > > > > jo> Today I decided to finally do what I've been planning to do for a long > > jo> time: move stuff out of the contributors article and instead place it > > jo> under www/. > > jo> > > jo> I started with the teams etc and you can see the results here (nowhere > > jo> near finished yet though): > > jo> > > jo> http://people.freebsd.org/~joel/wii/team.html > > jo> > > jo> So, why bother anyway? Well: > > jo> > > jo> - Better information about what the different teams do and what their > > jo> responsibilities are. Our developers are generally very confused > > jo> when it comes to finding the right person to talk to, for example > > jo> when requesting repo-copies or new perforce accounts etc. This will > > jo> hopefully improve the situation somewhat. > > jo> - The translation teams generally don't translate the contributors > > jo> article since it doesn't seem to be worth the effort. Hopefully > > jo> this will change now, since this can be quite important information > > jo> even for non-English speaking people. > > jo> - Email addresses are not completely visible anymore. > > jo> - This information does not really belong in an article. > > jo> - This is more up-to-date and includes a lot more teams etc. > > > > It is good to make the contributors list up-to-date, but what is the > > benefit to move it to the www tree? And where is the source file? > > You'll get to see the source when I have something to show you. > > > I think issue we have for the list is that this sort of information > > is scattered in the doc/www tree and the scattered information is > > difficult to maintain (remember a case of the mirror site list). So > > I think the direction we should go is to have a directory for the > > developers, build a structure to pick up necessary information from > > it, and leave the maintenance to each developer (like pgpkey). > > Maintaining such a directory in an HTML page is not a good idea---if > > we have active maintainers of the list it will work, but it will not > > last long unfortunately. Since I could not find the source file of > > your proposed team.html I am not sure how this page was generated, > > but if it was done by hand let's take account of the maintenance > > issue first. > > I've been maintaining the contributors article for almost 1,5 year now, > in case you haven't noticed. This won't change anytime soon. A long time ago, I tried a similar cleanup, which is why we have our current setup today. Originally we had two more documents covering this information, and I tried to fill up the article, but fell short. I can't remember why, I think someone whined to me and I told them to do it themselves. Or perhaps I just got busy with something else. Can't remember. Regardless, I'm glad to see someone picking up where I had left off. Thanks Joel. -- Tom Rhodes