573
edits
User talk:Bigstones/Essay:A plan for a reorganization of the wiki: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
User talk:Bigstones/Essay:A plan for a reorganization of the wiki (view source)
Revision as of 23:59, 8 May 2014
, 8 May 2014→Approaching CategoryTree: reply
m (missing title to 1st thread) |
(→Approaching CategoryTree: reply) |
||
| Line 134: | Line 134: | ||
: * shaders are middleware/base package development, i.e. do not typically require SG/FG commit access or C++ changes, and are thus not generally considered "core" development. | : * shaders are middleware/base package development, i.e. do not typically require SG/FG commit access or C++ changes, and are thus not generally considered "core" development. | ||
: * Overall, I'd suggest not to tamper with categories/areas that you don't understand, i.e. that require interpretations of different types of contributions-those categories are unlikely to be relevant to end-users anyway. And people who are looking for this info will typically also understand the various differences. Cleaning up such things is low priority in my opinion, someone able to build from source and program in C++ is unlikely to be affected by proper/improper categories, so no need to waste any time here-better focus on popular articles and categories first. Existing contributors, especially core developers, are unlikely to benefit greatly from such wiki improvements, and to be honest: most of us don't care at all - there are very few core developers who actually contribute to the wiki, let alone care for formalizing such differences and boundaries.--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 23:16, 8 May 2014 (UTC) | : * Overall, I'd suggest not to tamper with categories/areas that you don't understand, i.e. that require interpretations of different types of contributions-those categories are unlikely to be relevant to end-users anyway. And people who are looking for this info will typically also understand the various differences. Cleaning up such things is low priority in my opinion, someone able to build from source and program in C++ is unlikely to be affected by proper/improper categories, so no need to waste any time here-better focus on popular articles and categories first. Existing contributors, especially core developers, are unlikely to benefit greatly from such wiki improvements, and to be honest: most of us don't care at all - there are very few core developers who actually contribute to the wiki, let alone care for formalizing such differences and boundaries.--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 23:16, 8 May 2014 (UTC) | ||
:: Thanks for spending the time, I fully understood the Developer Plans part and the last part is practically the "safe area" I wrote about (kinda scared by the amount of data you harvest and pile up everyday). However, if this is how things are, maybe that could be renamed to Core developer plans. It might be a minor change, but clarifies the boundary, or that might get filled by random plans (I myself put some stuff there and will remedy). I didn't expect core devs to be so few. PS: Sorry for the "NOPE not c++" commit, I should have read a couple lines more! | |||
:: --[[User:Bigstones|Bigstones]] ([[User talk:Bigstones|talk]]) 23:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Tools for a better "new article" interface == | == Tools for a better "new article" interface == | ||