maria-docs team mailing list archive

[Shaun McCance <shaunm@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 09:54 -0500, Daniel Bartholomew wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 16:14:34 -0500
> Shaun McCance <shaunm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Shaun> Hi all,
> Shaun> 
> Shaun> What are your thoughts on adding stub articles/sections to the
> Shaun> KB? For example, adding an article for how to specify account
> Shaun> names without actually writing the content, along with a note to
> Shaun> whoever comes along about what the article should contain.
> Shaun> 
> Shaun> I've seen stubs work well in other docs efforts. They're an easy
> Shaun> way for contributors to cherry pick work. But with the
> Shaun> "everything is always published" model of a wiki-like KB, stubs
> Shaun> can be annoying to average readers, like a 90s-esque "under
> Shaun> construction" banner.
> Shaun> 
> Shaun> Thoughts?
> 
> I'm fine with the idea of stubs, as long as they don't get lost or
> forgotten about. They are a good way to encourage participation and
> plot a course for what to add to the KB next.
> 
> To keep track of them, we could add a checkbox to the edit page to mark
> whether or not a page is considered a stub, and then have a special
> page that lists all stubs.

Instead of a boolean flag for stubs, how about an enum field for status?
Stubs would be one status. This could help you keep track of which pages
you've thoroughly reviewed, for example.

--
Shaun