Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org

[Carlos Soriano Sanchez <csoriano redhat com>]

Hi Allan,

Thanks a lot for your feedback, disagreement is the best to reach an agreement =)

---------------------------------------- This is not important

I don't feel jhbuidl to me in practice very different. We do the same with git. What I want is creating an
assistant (like a GtkAssistant, only one direction) which explains the firsts steps using whatever is 
necessary.
Your proposal here is: when the jhbuild part arrives, link to another page. That was my intention
previously as well, but that changed when the topic proposal came to my mind.

Instead of linking for every tool manual, create a single page with whatever is necessary, not focusing in 
the actual tools.
This is what https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/BuildGnome currently does.

When we were discussing about adding a "Getting started" in jhbuild *completely* equal to BuildGnome jhbuild 
part, these problems arise in my mind:
- That "getting started" is for just contributing to Gnome? Can we make others assumptions as well? Jhbuild 
still
is a generic tool. If we do this (and whatever we do with GnomeLove we still want this), I see the Ryan 
Lortie guide (HowDoI/Jhbuild) a better fit here.
- So at the end of the guide, we link to contribute with patches 
https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/CodeContributionWorkflow?? Seems unrelated.
- So they go back and forward instead of remaining in the same page?

But to be honest, I don't mind doing it like what you want. It's not even a concern for me right now.

------------------------------------------ This is important =)

So your assumption is right, moving most of the material of GnomeLove.

I understand what you mean with removing "community maintained", but can be misleading for others. Let me 
explain:
developer.gnome.org is still maintained by the community, but they go through a review process, and gives 
control to the maintainers.
Like any project we have in git.
I agree is not that easy to edit, and that can to remove some "quick edit" from community. That is what we 
will miss. But if we make it
intelligent, the pages won't need much maintainability. Contributing to Gnome didn't changed that much in the 
years I have been contributing (3).

Why is a problem the wiki? Why we have that feeling that currently is difficult to maintain the wiki, if we 
move to a website we are making even more difficult?
Seems I'm going to do just the opposite of what we want right? =)

Let me explain. For what I saw in this years, the burden of the difficulty is not in editing the wiki, but in 
the variety of what we have!
And I am 100% sure about this from my POV.
I edited 5 different jhbuild pages, 2 different guides to get started, 3 guides for git... etc. and 
everything is scattered.

So imagine, I take now a OPW to clean everything of this. In one year we will have the same problem =) I 
can't be bold in the wiki,
I don't feel to be bold in the wiki. A specific example (and this one is what made the topic proposal came to 
my mind):
I wrote for some months BuildGnome alongside removing some guides (reaching an agreement really takes long 
time) and trying to discuss everything.
I finished, and I linked BuildGnome on GnomeLove as the *official* guide.
One month after that Ryan Lortie write a full jhbuild guide in HowDoI/Jhbuild because he thought there were 
no guide for jhbuild! 
He is a experienced developer and couldn't notice we had 3 jhbuild guides at that point! Clearly we are doing 
something wrong...
So what now? After he spent that much time writing that very well explained guide, I say to him: hey sorry, 
I'm going to delete because 
we already have others and in GnomeLove we already have one linked.
No, I don't feel like doing it.
We can't stop new jhbuild/git tutorials. What I think we have to do is make clear we have a official one, and 
that needs review to
*create* or *modify* it. There we can be bold, because we will have the control, and we will avoid telling 
people we will remove their material.

To finalize, can you say to me which pages need that much work from you? It was because they were 
unmaintained? Or it was because all were
scattered and need a big reorder? Could we getting rid of that parts that need change over the time, or write 
it in a way that doesn't need
to change?

I'm curious how didn't you notice the same I'm thinking. That those pages actually don't change that much, 
but is actually the scattered of those
which makes it the need to change them.
If we do it intelligently, I can imagine that the need to maintain it will be almost null =)

What does "bus factor 1" mean?

Cheers,
Carlos Soriano