On Apr 9, 2007, at 1:46 PM, Landon Fuller wrote:
On Apr 9, 2007, at 10:17, markd@macports.org wrote:
But the disadvantage, as opposed to a Wiki, is that joe user can't make changes to the docs. And that is what people want. Although I wonder if we have Joe user contributing to the docs if it will really be better. It may be, I just don't know.
I've come across a number of projects using wiki documentation lately. Lacking any centralized editing, it tends to vary wildly in quality, substance, and style. Information is poorly organized and difficult to find, and documentation is often duplicated.
Maybe my experiences aren't a sufficiently representative example, but I've been left with a very poor impression of open source wiki documentation.
-landonf
I'm, personally, not opposed to Docbook but think that Wiki documentation would happen a lot quicker. It all depends on whether there is anyone putting significant effort into documentation. If there is a documentation lead who keeps on top of it and manages changes, submissions, etc., Docbook is a logical choice. If documentation is taking a back seat, I think the Wiki is the best alternative to no documentation. Let us users share what we glean from the mailing-lists and using MacPorts in the absence of documentation by the people who built it. Sean