No subject

It was official recognition for putting together a FAQ ...AND having it
hosted by archlinux.

Bob Finch

>
> We will always seriously consider all questions that are seriously posed
> related to Arch Linux and the development of technologies and
> information surrounding it.
>
> How's that for official? (ok, it's not coming from Judd, but I know I
> will).
>
> About the specific questions, I can't make any official statements about
> the first one.  Common practice has been to include the most common
> features and let people who need the edge cases compile through ABS.
> What a common feature is is always in contention.
>
> If you don't have a problem, your method should go something like this:
>  - Figure out if the problem is because of something you've done wrong
> (by
> checking with others on the forum, mailing list, and/or irc.
>  - If the problem is with something you've done, not it wherever you
> asked
> the question.
>  - If the problem is with the package, submit a bug report.
>
> That's what I've always told people.
>
> To anticipate another question: What does it take to get official
> recognition?
>
> You must prove that you have the gumption to initiate a project (it's a
> lot harder than you'd think) and continue to maintain it for a
> significant amount of time (which I don't have a good fixed number for
> right now...).
>
> A lot of people do actually come here and say, "this needs to be changed
> and that needs to be changed and I hate this", and then when it comes
> time to back up what they've said or do the work, they've disappeared.
>
> You (the abstract 'you') will not get recognition without having already
> put work into a solution.
>
>> Dusty> No resources for general linux info in wiki
>>
>> Why not? Is this a bandwidth, disk space, or labor issue?  Half of the
>> really good questions /  problems are not going to be Arch specific.
>> I'd like to get as much useful information in the  wiki as possible.
>> Understanding that I'm not suggesting devs do the work, is there any
>> reason why we couldn't handle non-arch specific issues  that our users
>> encounter?
>
> Have you seen the trend in common questions in the Arch community?  I'd
> say only 10-20% of them are configuration stuff that is not Arch
> specific.  I think the community as a whole has done a good job of
> teaching people how to search for things on their own.
>
> It's mostly a labour issue, to answer the question directly.  Why spend
> 70% of your time working on something only 20% of the people will use?
> Why not spend it working on something that 70% of the people will use?
>
>> Conclusions
>>
>> How do we move forward?  I would like to continue to solicit "vision"
>> form the devs, "ideas"  from the community, and help from anybody who
>> can spare some time.  Forum  consolidation, active topics, and pkg
>> contribution systems are all things we have to rely on  the devs for.
>> We can put the suggestions out there and what they can do, great.
>> Devs  please sanction an information organization push in the
>> background of the wiki.  We can  promise not to touch the existing
>> pages until we have something to show.  I'd like to start with  a
>> basic FAQ organization, but there's much more that can be added.
>
> The moving forward part is easy to say but hard to do: just keep
> working.
>
> I have no problem with an information organization push in the
> background of the wiki, but you might want to ask the people who
> actually maintain the wiki (people like Rasat and Dusty).
>
> If you continue to ask about "vision", we'll continue to answer.
>
> Jason
>
> --
> If you understand, things are just as they are.  If you do not
> understand, things are just as they are.
>
> My old gpg key expired, the new one is available from keyservers.  I was
> stupid enough not to realize this before it was too late, so I am not
> able to sign my new key with my old key.  If this assurance isn't
> enough, please contact me.