Re: [Audacity-devel] 1.4.0 Manual (was Additional beta?)

[James C. <cr...@in...>]

Vaughan Johnson wrote:
> Richard Ash wrote:

>> I'm slightly wary of giving free for all access to the manual wiki,
>> because once you do that, review becomes very difficult to do (it's
>> rather like allowing open CVS access)...

>> ..maybe use the main wiki as a sandbox / testing ground...

>> We can then invite anyone to work on the pages on the wiki, and email us
>> once they have something they think is worth including, which makes
>> reviewing a lot easier.
>> Richard

> I agree!
> - V

I think the need for having an extra step for the manual is probably 
less than you (Richard and Vaughan) think and could just cause more 
work.  On the main wiki we tend to get a mix of obvious vandalism and 
serious contributions.  Once we get it established that there are 
certain conventions to be adhered to for the manual pages, and 
particularly if there are contributors willing to also 'police' this, I 
don't foresee trouble in making the manual wiki more open.

If the consensus is still that caution is better here, could we instead 
of using the main wiki as a sandbox ask Buanzo to make a copy of the 
/manual/ wiki as /draft_of_manual/ on audacityteam.org and get people to 
edit that?  I'd expect that given that the wiki software is already 
installed, making extra wikis is quick and easy to do.  I'm just a bit 
uncomfortable about mixing the draft of the manual and the general 
audacity wiki all on the same wiki.  This way we also get the current 
draft as the starting point.

--James