Future of LFS

Julio Meca Hansen lydianknight at gmail.com
Mon May 19 09:50:04 PDT 2008

> In another email I mentioned Wikipedia as an example, but I don't
> necessarily think LFS needs to go to that level of open editing. Really,
> what I had in mind was simply making the editing tasks simpler and
> easier to attack, so that when it comes time to do the work of adding
> content to the book that it is less of a chore.

What I was thinking was some kinf of (strange, I have to admit) mixture
between Wikipedia and git, where we could be adding some new
instructions for the book, among text, clarifications, notes, but that
changes not being added inmediately, but more like... having that change
being stored in kind of a temporary submit to be reviewed, or using kind
of a submit buffer, just in case a certain addition breaks the process and
we can revert it to its previous state (although it's a level of complexity
that I don't know if we can take right now)

> If we can at the same time find some way of encouraging non-editors to
> submit content for review, I think we'd be on the right path.

I think it's a very nice step to take into account, at least the 
part of the process would go quite fast (having to revert and trace errors
would be a different matter, tough...)


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list