7 Matching Annotations
  1. Aug 2022
    1. "Why have a locked wiki when you can instead just post static Web pages?"

      What even is a locked wiki insofar as the ways it differs from traditional (pre-wiki) content publishing pipelines? Where's the wiki part of it?

  2. Jul 2022
    1. we quickly found it to be the wrong match for our content-heavy documentation experience. Gatsby inherits many dependency chains to provide its featureset, but running the dependency-heavy toolchain locally on contributors’ machines proved to be an incredibly difficult and slow task for many of our documentation contributors

      This wouldn't be so annoying to read if it weren't the case that this was solved like 15+ years ago by the right tool for the job: wikis.

      I see the "neo-OSS era" or "New Social era" of today to stand in sharp contrast with what I've previously referred to as the Shirky era. In the world of software development, the regressions from the transition from the Shirky era to the present, monumental though those regressions are, have been quietly underreported (seemingly hardly even perceived). We've seen the rise and consolidation of open source project management around a centralized (and perversely, closed source) service provider that's more of a social network and valued for that reason than it is a decent bugtracker or wiki. It calls things wikis that aren't, not just diluting the word but instead transforming it into something that is by now effectively meaningless—along with encouraging awful mixing of support requests and freeform discussion with bugtracking (but that's beside the point).

      The big hallmark of this era: obtuse publishing pipelines that seek to replicate the compiler-input →compiler → compiler-output workflow, pushed heavily by new programmers who first encountered compilers during this era and encouraged by others who bafflingly insist on applying this poorly chosen hammer to the non-nail-shaped problem. Why? What I can make out:

      1. the omnipresent and inescapable influence of Ra

      2. a desperation for legitimacy at a time when low-level system programming has been in decline

      3. people just genuinely unable to perceive the effects of complexification, like the way some people cannot enjoy cilantro, or the way others cannot accurately track the passage of time without external help

      It'd be nice if we could get back to a place where we understood that the point of all this stuff is to make things easier—particularly in the here and now, and not in some mythical, never-reached promised land where travelers are perpetually kept away by the YAGNI demons.

    1. To make a page on MySpace, all it took was text in a textbox.The text could be words or code.Anyone could read the words and see the code.
  3. Apr 2022
    1. To drive this point home:

      I sometimes get people who balk at my characterization of GitHub-style anti-wikis as being inferior to, you know, actual wikis. "You can just use the GitHub UI to edit the files", they'll sometimes say.

      A case study: a couple days ago, I noticed that the lone link in the current README for Jeff Zucker's solid-rest project is a 404. I made a note of it. Just now, I reset my GitLab password, logged in to solid/chat, and notified Jeff https://gitter.im/solid/chat?at=611976c009a1c273827b3bd1. Jeff's response was, "I'll change it".

      This case is rich with examples of what makes unwikis so goddamn inefficient to work with. First, my thought upon finding the broken link was to take note of it (i.e. so that it can eventually be taken care of) rather than fixing it immediately, as would have been the case with a wiki. More on this in a bit. Secondly, my eventual action was still not something that directly addressed the problem—it was to notify someone else† of the problem so that it might be fixed by them, due to the unwiki nature of piles of Git-managed markdown. Thirdly, even Jeff's reflex is not to immediately change it—much like my reaction, his is to note the need for a fix himself and then to tell me he's going to change it, which he will presumably eventually do. Tons of rigamarole just to get a link fixed‡ that remains broken even after having gone through all this.

      † Any attempt to point the finger at me here (i.e. coming up short from having taken the wrong action—notifying somebody rather than doing it myself) would be getting it wrong. First, the fact that I can't just make an edit without taking into account the myriad privacy issues that GitHub presents is materially relevant! Secondly, even if I had been willing to ignore that thorn (or jump through the necessary hoops to work around it) and had used the GitHub web UI as prescribed, it still would have ended up as a request for someone else to actually take action on, because I don't control the project.

      ‡ Any attempt to quibble here that I'm talking about changing a README and not (what GitHub considers) a wiki page gets it wrong. We're here precisely because GitHub's unwikis are a bunch of files of markdown. The experience of changing an unwiki page would be rife with the same problems as encountered here.

    1. Yes, the website itself is a project that welcomes contributions. If you’d like to add information, fix errors, or make improvements (especially to the visual design), talk to @ivanreese in the Slack or open a PR.

      Contribution: make it a wiki. (An actual wiki, not GitHub-style anti-wikis.)

    1. Each entry is a Markdown file stored in the _pages directory.

      Nah, dude. That's not a wiki.

  4. Mar 2022
    1. There are way too many dipshits who are way too happy to come out of the woodwork when this topic is brought up to try to drop an FYI wisdom nugget on you about how github.com will let you skip a few of these steps and do the edit/commit thing directly in your browser. Great job on almost entirely missing the point, morons. Let's be excruciatingly clear:

      If, at any point, "submit a PR" comes up during an explanation of how to do a run-of-the-mill edit on your project's wiki, then your project does not have a wiki.