Wiki-fying docs

[Matthew Dillon]

    I think I have to agree with Hiten.  I like the collaborative nature
    of Wiki and I could see us generating a Wiki compatible set of 
    documents for the purpose of public comment, and use that to generate
    patches back into the official document format.  But I don't think we
    can use Wiki as a basis for the documentation... it doesn't have a 
    formal enough infrastructure to serve as a good basis.

    If someone wants to write a Wiki-generator from the documentation and
    a patch generator to deal with changes (not for the purpose of 
    attempting to auto-patch back into the original infrastructure, since
    that would be impossible, but for review and reintegration purposes)...
    that would be pretty cool.

					-Matt
					Matthew Dillon 
					<dillon at xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
:
:Justin C. Sherrill wrote:
:> I've noticed that there's been a number of people who have wanted to
:> contribute to docs, but the process of installing the doc-proj port and
:> all its dependencies, plus talking SGML, plus building it, is forming a
:> sort of barrier to entry.  I think I'm the only poor soul that's done it.
:> 
:> I was thinking we could copy the existing docs into a Wiki, and see how
:> contributions change from there.  Mashing wiki changes back into CVS may
:> be less laborious than putting other people through the docproj wringer. 
:> Can anyone think of any objections?
:
:	Let's not use Wiki for professional project documentation.
:
:	Sure, use it as a staging area, but not for the final thing.
:
:		-Hiten
: