On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 07:56:19 -0700, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:47 AM, <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: > > This impression comes along with the authority of potential authors. > > > > If only the release manager can write a document, it is very official. > > If any committer can write, but nobody else, it feels less officical. > > If anybody could modify the document, it's even less official. > > > > Since anybody can write to the Python wiki, it feels not very official. > > It's the same reason why people often trust Wikipedia less than a > > printed encyclopedia. > > I want to believe your theory (since I also have a feeling that some > wiki pages feel less trustworthy than others) but my own use of > Wikipedia makes me skeptical that this is all there is -- on many > pages on important topics you can clearly tell that a lot of effort > went into the article, and then I trust it more. On other places you > can tell that almost nobody cared. But I never look at the names of > the authors.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. The Python wiki pages mostly feel like nobody cares. At least that's the case for the ones I've stumbled across. And I'd include my own contributions in that (the email-sig wiki), because I was using them as a work area and have not updated them in some time, since development is now in a code repository. If we can recruit a bunch of somebodies who *do* care, then the wiki would be much more useful. But I still don't want to edit the dev docs there, if I have a choice :) There's a reason I stopped updating the wiki as soon as I moved to a code repository. -- R. David Murray www.bitdance.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
