Greg <curtys...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2025-05-16, Jonathan Dowland <j...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Thu May 15, 2025 at 2:33 PM BST, Dan Ritter wrote: > >> 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. > > That's what I said more succinctly. Keep the wikis up to date (I > thought it went without saying "for Debian stable," though there's > always a myriad of ways to be misunderstood but normally only one way > to be so).
It's not quite the same. What Dan is asking for is that each wiki page should identify when it was updated and for which named release(s) of Debian it is valid. So even if it's out of date it may be useful to somebody, or it may be possible to deduce what's wrong for the current stable in some circumstances. > > Thank you. That is useful feedback, and I agree that we should be > > clear about what version of Debian a given page (or section) > > applies to. (And we should default to documenting Debian stable, > > IMHO) > > > > I suggested we establish a standard way to do this as part of > > someone else's efforts to write fresh content guidelines¹. I should > > pick that effort back up and finish it off. > > > > [1] > > https://wiki.debian.org/MaythamAlsudany/DraftContentGuidelines/Discussion >
