<Mic92>
people prefer to write wikis instead of nixpkgs documentatoin
<Mic92>
*documentation
<gchristensen>
can't hardly blame them
<samueldr>
the barrier of entry is probably much smaller than 1) docbook 2) inside the nixpkgs repository
<gchristensen>
and the debugging process for bad docbook is awful with our current tooling
<samueldr>
and: no need to get approval for instant results
<samueldr>
I mean, once I press save, I can link the result
* samueldr
thinks there should be a "graduation" process for wiki entries
<samueldr>
maybe not "should", but "could"
* lexcurious
luv nixos wiki at this moment with it's ease of adding changes and instantly publish em
<gchristensen>
yeah
<gchristensen>
maybe one day I'll get daps to actually work with the nixos docs
<asymmetric>
i went through a relatively painful learning experience while creating a python package pr, and i thought i would document it :)
<makefu>
gchristensen: i think a one-man effort to work on the docs is not really sustainable. the best thing i think is to enable the community to actually be able to contribute. imho the wiki is a good step in this direction. maybe some parts of the manual may even be removed and put into the wiki instead
<samueldr>
asymmetric: ♥ that you are contributing to the global mindshare instead of keeping it as a mental note
<gchristensen>
I agree
<gchristensen>
Makefu I agrre
* lexcurious
agrees with makefu
<lexcurious>
but however ihmo, manual and wiki could continue peacefully co exist side by side, while wiki be the bleeding edge user pov info source, and manual would be official stabe doc
<lexcurious>
*stable
asymmetric has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<makefu>
lexcurious: exactly that. the manual should be a stable reference