6,566
edits
Talk:FGAddon: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Cost analysis.
(Cost analysis.) |
|||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
::: The idea can be seen at [http://wiki.flightgear.org/Template:Git_clone] - i.e. originally, we were hoping to grow a library of templates that can be parameterized, not just in terms of "actions" (clone, update/pull, push etc), but also in front-end terms - e.g. by adding screen shots for different front-ends and dynamically showing the matching UI front-end (or shell instructions). ::: The whole thing was inspired by the discussion at [[Talk:Development Workflow]]. For instance, for NetBeans: | ::: The idea can be seen at [http://wiki.flightgear.org/Template:Git_clone] - i.e. originally, we were hoping to grow a library of templates that can be parameterized, not just in terms of "actions" (clone, update/pull, push etc), but also in front-end terms - e.g. by adding screen shots for different front-ends and dynamically showing the matching UI front-end (or shell instructions). ::: The whole thing was inspired by the discussion at [[Talk:Development Workflow]]. For instance, for NetBeans: | ||
[[File:Netbeans-staying-up2date.png|thumb|git pull via NetBeans]]--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 14:05, 27 October 2015 (EDT) | [[File:Netbeans-staying-up2date.png|thumb|git pull via NetBeans]]--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 14:05, 27 October 2015 (EDT) | ||
:::: In an abstract way, I can see how this would be useful. In a concert way - i.e. the fine details of how this should be implemented - I cannot see this yet. I need some time to think about it. The main issue is that the exact commands to type, which are essential and without which the article cannot function, are very much specific to the prompt UI of svn, git, and git-svn. Each GUI does this differently, packaging a number of the commands into one menu entry or button. I think for this task that the GUI diversity is insane, and we cannot provide full coverage, and that the major focus of the article should be the command line. | |||
:::: For URL templates, some of these may have a slight advantage. However look at history - of the Gitoriuos to SF transition. If we had had Gitorious templates, these and there surrounding instructions would be hopelessly out of date and nothing could be done in the template to fix it. The fixing action would be to search for all instances in the wiki and replace, and this would be the same amount of work with or without the template. The other situation where a template would be useful is if the SF url changes. However this might require a template change and search+fix all instances anyway. Also the SF urls are pretty much fixed in stone and very unlikely to change. So template+template usage costs may be higher than pure command+url usage. From a pure cost analysis perspective, I'm not convinced of the benefit yet. | |||
:::: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 11:22, 28 October 2015 (EDT) | |||