Re: [boost] Moving wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines

Subject: Re: [boost] Moving wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-08-02 09:12:56

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Stefan Seefeld via Boost
> Sent: 02 August 2018 09:43
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Cc: Stefan Seefeld
> Subject: Re: [boost] Moving wiki/Guidelines/WarningsGuidelines
> 
> On 2018-08-02 04:18 AM, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:
> 
> > On 2 August 2018 at 10:09, Stefan Seefeld via Boost
> > <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> On 2018-08-02 03:59 AM, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:
> >>> Paul Bristow suggested [1]
> >>>
> >>> "We might also re-host this document somewhere on github/boostorg?"
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2018/07/242617.php
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to edit and move the wiki page away from Trac.
> >>>
> >>> IMHO, it is reasonable to host it not on GitHub wiki but
> >>> on boost.org along other guidelines, for example, at
> >>> https://www.boost.org/development/warnings.html
> >>>
> >>> - It is easy to update website via pull requests.
> >>> - Any updates would be a subject of some review at least
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts? Objections?
> >> I don't think this is a good idea, as it contributes to the proliferation of
> >> locations to look for to find information (or to contribute updates), which
> >> will also result in duplicate (in the best case) or contradictory (in the
> >> worst case) information.
> > You've lost me.
> > I'm suggesting *single* place to maintain all the common Boost development
> > guidelines, namely boost.org.
> >
> >> Ideally, boost.org should consist of a *very* small
> >> number of static pages (a hub, really) with links to other pages, such as
> >> project-specific websites (e.g. http://boostorg.github.io/
>),

> > Clearly, we have a hierarchy of the recommendations here:
> > - common guidelines
> > - library-specific guidelines based on/extending the common ones
> >
> > I'm talking about common guidelines here, not the library-specific ones.
> >
> >> or the wiki (https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki).> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> > I suggest to not to maintain common guidelines on GitHub wiki or
> > anywhere else - Wiki is volatile,
> > too easy to edit by too many or too easy to sneak unwanted edits.
> 
> I think it's a judgment call, really:
> 
> I see your point, and I agree: on the one hand we have
> version-controlled (relatively static) content, on the other we have
> easy-to-change volatile content.
> 
> If it were for truly static content, I would wholeheartedly agree with
> you. But a document describing how to deal with (compiler-specific)
> warnings is inherently a moving target, and thus will quickly get stale
> unless it's been actively maintained (read: updated regularly). And if
> it's hard to change, people will just add their own guidelines elsewhere...

I agree that making it easy to change is really important, so while pull requests are OK,
if there is a long delay in getting them accepted, it won't work well.

(We have had trouble with spammers putting junk on Trac - for reasons incomprehensible.  I fear Github wiki might become a magnet to
these idiots  So we really do need to have some filtering, but not so that it puts people off suggesting changes.)

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal UK LA8 8AB
[phone]