Jonathan Dowland wrote: > FYI, some of us have recently re-started an effort to improve the Debian > Wiki. One of the things we need to establish (IMHO) is to determine what > audience the wiki is *for*. For example, it serves a useful function for > Developers, with clusters of pages for Debconfs, summers of code, etc., > and well-maintained pages for some developer tools. > > It's less clear how useful the current wiki is for users. I think many of us > are inspired by how good the Arch Wiki is for users, and the Debian wiki > falls far short of that. I guess we should try to improve it for users, but > we don't have consensus on exactly how to do that, yet. > Suggestions welcome!
I'll bite. The most prominent issue I can see is that there is no unified sense of chronology. That is, I can look at a page and not have any idea whether it is correct for current Stable. A reorganization along the lines of the Postgresql doc wiki would be a massive effort, but also really useful. If you haven't encountered it, the navigation at the top looks like: Documentation → PostgreSQL 17 Supported Versions: Current (17) / 16 / 15 / 14 / 13 Development Versions: 18 / devel Unsupported versions: 12 / 11 / 10 / 9.6 / 9.5 / 9.4 / 9.3 / 9.2 / 9.1 / 9.0 / 8.4 / 8.3 / 8.2 / 8.1 on every single page. The right thing for the Debian Wiki would be: Documentation → Debian 12 Bookworm Stable Version: 12 Bookworm Long Term Support Version: 11 Bullseye Unsupported Versions: 10 / 9 / 8 / 7 / 6 / 5 / 4 / 3 / 2 with unavailable pages greyed out (but clickable and thus creatable for folks with accounts) That would be a huge improvement. -dsr-
