Re: [9front] Two errors in fqa

[Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com>]

On June 25, 2021 6:40:44 PM EDT, kvik <kvik@a-b.xyz> wrote:
>The name 'docs' is unfortunate.
>I did not (neccessarilly) hope for it to be a The Documentation thing.
>It was primarily to be a dumping ground for articles that can't be manual pages or aren't, under my interpretation, a fit for the FQA, or aren't /sys/doc-worthy (yet?) -- most people would call it a wiki...
>
>25 Jun 2021 23:16:38 Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net>:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 12:16:22PM +0100, Stuart Morrow wrote:
>>> On 25/06/2021, Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net> wrote:
>>>> What is wrong with people finding the wiki, anyway?
>>> 
>>> Nothing is "wrong" with it, but it's called docs when it's really the
>>> documentation equivalent of /extra.  So it's called docs and linked to
>>> from the front page when it's really the furthest thing from *the*
>>> documentation.
>> 
>> I don't think the intention is for that wiki to be /extra-like.  I can't
>> speak for kvik but I always thought the goal was to be comprehensive.
>> 
>> People complained that the FQA was considered 'the' documentation when
>> nobody voted for sl, now people are complaining that other efforts are
>> masquerading as 'the' documentation.  Unless and until the project
>> develops a watery tart to lob scimitars at people I don't see the
>> advantage in promoting one best-effort documentation project over
>> another, even if I happen to prefer one.
>> 
>> khm
>

maybe we could rename it to wiki?

sl