Installation usability testing

[Gervase Markham]

On 06/04/09 12:30, Frédéric Buclin wrote:
> Le 06. 04. 09 12:16, Gervase Markham a écrit :
>  > not necessary to make sure a doc compiles. A rule that "the docs must
>  > compile and all the tests run" would still make updates far more
>  > friction-free than the current system.
>
> Except that almost nobody compiles the doc besides Colin, me and a few
> other reviewers. Many contributors have no working installation
> (doc-related, due to dependencies to compile them).

Right. You are arguing my point for me :-) It's too hard to contribute 
to the docs.

>  > I would anticipate that when we shipped a release, we could export the
>  > current version of the wiki to a static version.
>
> That's not ideal, IMO. And someone would have to check all contributions
> to make sure someone is not adding some stupid stuff in it.

Why would you have to do that particularly in that system? Just like in 
the current system, if you find a problem, you fix it when you find it.

>  > OK, but what about my major point? Loads of people have installed
>  > Bugzilla over the past 18 months, and not one of them has done this. Why
>  > not?
>
> Because people don't care too much about updating the doc as soon as
> they understood how Bugzilla works, IMHO. We have a lot of stuff on Wiki
> now, and the number of contributions is not larger than for the doc in
> CVS, I think (based on pages I watch).

Well, I didn't even know there were docs in the wiki, and they aren't 
linked to from here: http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/ so perhaps it's 
because people don't know about them?

What docs do we currently keep in wiki form?

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla