Re: The old wiki.netbsd.se

[Jan Danielsson <jan.m.danielsson%gmail.com@localhost>]

On 2016-12-02 19:48, Swift Griggs wrote:
[---]
> I'm considering snarfing all my content back outta the wayback machine
> and resurrecting my own version of it. However, I'd first like to
> understand the original story if anyone knows it. Was it hackers beating
> on the site? Spammers take over the mail relay? Did the guy just get a
> divorce and his ex-wife's alimony take away the bandwidth fees?

   There was a thread about this a long while back, I believe the
argument was that it would be better for the community to have one
authoritative wiki so all useful information could be centrally managed.
 I also seem to recall that there were some voices saying that the
official NetBSD wiki broke the spirit of a wiki -- but in the end some
consensus was reached.  If you search around in the mailing list
archives I'm sure you'll be able to find the thread I'm referring to.

   I can see both sides of the argument (having a de facto standard
unofficial wiki vs not having one); I had some experience with "the"
Gentoo unofficial wiki which I think is illustrative:

   In addition to the official Gentoo wiki there used to be an unoffical
wiki.  There was a time when I ran Gentoo on a laptop and I used both
the unofficial and official wikis to set it up.  The unofficial wiki
suggested that one should "update world" from time to time -- so I
regularly ran an world update, and one time it bork'd my installation
(couldn't get any gcc to run, which in Gentoo is bad..).

   I asked on IRC if it was a known issues and was told that one should
*never*, under any circumstances, "update world", and that following
some random unofficial wiki was a recipe for disaster.

   I'm thinking that's *exactly* the kind of scenario TNF wants to avoid
by not having a de facto standard wiki which is unofficial.

[---]
> Maybe I was the only one who liked it and I'm just wasting my time.

   No you're not the only one, I liked it and I know others who did --
but it's a little more complicated than that.

   /Jan