On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 at 13:26, The Wanderer <wande...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > On 2025-03-04 at 03:24, Anssi Saari wrote: > > David <bouncingc...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> It would assist everyone to follow changes to this "Monthly FAQ" > >> document if it can be hosted somewhere that provides diffs, such as > >> salsa.debian.org, or wiki.debian.org. > > I don't see a problem with just posting the diffs. Preferably in > > unified format. > I wouldn't necessarily object to diffs, of course, but I don't really > expect that there will turn out to be a practicable way to provide them > that won't be either A: awkward or clunky to access from the recipient's > perspective, or B: non-negligibly more trouble to set up and provide from > the poster's perspective, if not both. > > (B would make it less worth the while for the person posting the FAQ to > bother with doing this at all - which is *another* part of the reason why > I haven't followed up to suggest the up-front "What's New" summary list, > since that would have the same problem to a different degree.) I suggested either salsa.debian.org or wiki.debian.org because both of these platforms: - are standard infrastructure for Debian - provide diffs with zero effort. Revision history is automatically available as a feature of both platforms. If the text is changed, then the history is automatically recorded. There's nothing else to do. The wiki would suit if the FAQ authors would like community input/assistance to write the FAQ. Or if the FAQ authors wish to restrict changes to authorised editors only, then hosting on salsa would be more suitable. As an example of diff/change history for a document on the wiki, https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa has a "last modified" link at the bottom which when clicked shows the revision history: https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa?action=info As an example of diff/change history for a document on salsa: https://salsa.debian.org/helmutg/debvm/-/blob/main/README.md has a history button which when clicked shows a list of changed files: https://salsa.debian.org/helmutg/debvm/-/commits/main?ref_type=HEADS and clicking the latest change at the top of the page: https://salsa.debian.org/helmutg/debvm/-/commit/e93660b51c4e68c2134b11791bfb76900bf4a01d shows the diff. Are these basic software development practices, tools and platforms not familiar to readers of this list? I am surprised to see words like "practicable" / "awkward" / "clunky" being used in this conversation, are these tools not standard practice in everyone's world? Given that this infrastructure exists and is being used by most people involved with producing Debian, it surprises me to hear talk of posting diffs to the mailing list, which requires too much effort by both writers and readers IMHO. Online diffs are easy, because the computer generates them. Whereas this ... > * I would find it helpful to also have, not *diffs*, but *a brief, > changelog-style list of What's New*, at the top of the FAQ would require extra time and effort by the document author, and for many people is possibly worse than a diff, for rapid comprehension. I won't write any more about this, I'm not at all concerned about it. I've only commented because the current approach seems seems to come from about 20 years in the past. I appreciate the many benefits I get from using Debian, and the last thing I want to do is sound ungrateful for any aspect of it :)
