Talk:Development Wiki: Difference between revisions
updating a bit
(moved with comments) |
(updating a bit) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
:Please, let us not further confuse things by renaming concepts without figuring out and stating clearly how things work. Let's focus on the [[Open questions]] instead. | :Please, let us not further confuse things by renaming concepts without figuring out and stating clearly how things work. Let's focus on the [[Open questions]] instead. | ||
The '''Development Wiki''', formerly known as '''R&D wiki''', is where [[software development concepts]], [[wiki management]] problems, etc., are discussed. Eventually other material will be spun off into [[Research Wiki]], formerly known as [[Opinion Wiki]], which will be a [[large public wiki]] with slightly better [[governance]] than most of those. | The '''Develop Wiki''' or '''Development Wiki''', formerly known as '''R&D wiki''', is where [[software development concepts]], [[wiki management]] problems, etc., are discussed. Eventually other material will be spun off into [[Research Wiki]], formerly known as [[Opinion Wiki]], which will be a [[large public wiki]] with slightly better [[governance]] than most of those. | ||
Meanwhile, the [[Signal Wiki]] | Meanwhile, the [[Publish Wiki]], (once [[Signal Wiki]] or [[Content Wiki]]), will have only the exact data required to generate the [[Consumerium buying signal]]. Nothing will get to this wiki until it has been debated thoroughly as research, and accepted by at least one [[faction]] as affecting [[individual buying criteria]] for those that trust them to make such decisions. This [[core data]], some of it [[factionally defined]], has to be good enough to justify deploying a whole [[healthy buying infrastructure]] just to get a look at it. | ||
Proving this will require a [[pilot]] project. | Proving this will require a [[pilot]] project. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
So maybe the process is: | So maybe the process is: | ||
:I suppose this "process" refers to the information flow from the '''Research Wiki''' into the '''Signal Wiki | :I suppose this "process" refers to the information flow from the '''Research Wiki''' into the '''Signal Wiki''' which is '''confusing''' because before the distinction between [[Content Wiki]] (for facts) and [[Opinion Wiki]] (for subjective views and campaigns based on subjective criteria) was clear and as unambiguous as it can get -- [[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 11:16, 23 Feb 2004 (EET) | ||
::No, it wasn't. Because the distinction between what is "subjective" and "objective" is up to the [[faction]] obviously. Does it take one [[troll]] to dispute something "objective" into subjectivity? Two? Six? Fourteen? It is a bogus distinction. One of the [[open questions]] is what form of [[w:consensus decision making]] should be assumed? And when we say something is "no longer an opinion but has become content" do we really mean "it isn't disputed by anyone editing here?" Or not by trusted people, or by significant numbers of trusted people? Is it right to say that the bureaucracy in a gov't handles "content" and the politicians only handle "opinion"? I think it isn't. | |||
::The name [[signal wiki]] just matches [[Consumerium buying signal]], "[[buying signal wiki]]" would be even clearer. The name [[research wiki]] just admits that the opinions we share here are just as valid as the ones one might find in [[Wikipedia]], probably more so, since we really care about solving a [[user-land]] problem, and they don't. That leaves the [[development wiki]], which is an obvious name used in many other projects. Also the fact that we are doing both "R" and "D" in this [[mediawiki]] for now, is acknowledged, that just becomes two functions when we go to a [[pilot]]. | |||
1. Stupid idea proposed in [[Development Wiki]] - [[trolls]] attack; Slightly less stupid ideas evolve like bacteria; Years of stupidity and trashing ideas might lead to one good [[90 day sprint]] ever year, two or three [[30 day sprint]]s, and maybe five or six [[14 day sprint]]s. Maybe three to five man years of work per year of [[software development]]. | 1. Stupid idea proposed in [[Development Wiki]] - [[trolls]] attack; Slightly less stupid ideas evolve like bacteria; Years of stupidity and trashing ideas might lead to one good [[90 day sprint]] ever year, two or three [[30 day sprint]]s, and maybe five or six [[14 day sprint]]s. Maybe three to five man years of work per year of [[software development]]. | ||