We've been working on a new set of documentation that is much more exhaustive. Will be starting to roll it out over the next couple of weeks.
@Mark Do you think the availability, route to gain access, and the functionality of the wiki software used to host the documentations portion of the site is a contributing aspect?
theoretically speaking, would a framework similar to the functionality of MediaWiki inhibit more activity and productivity in our wiki environment?
We've spent a grand total of about 6 hours developing our wiki app, so I can see that side, yes.
On the other hand, our old wiki (a traditional one) ended up taking a lot of time to manage because while the community contributed quite a bit, there was a lot of destruction that happened there as well. At this point I think the onus is on us to complete a first draft of the documentation - at least until more people from the community understand how & why things are done the way they are in the framework.
Have to agree with the points @sagar made. I love Vanilla 2, but feel that it's been released too early in the development phase - whether the developers felt it was too early is another matter.
One real bugbear for me and my soon to be users is the fact that they won't get an email confirming they've signed-up correctly (ie., using the right email address). As an example, I left this switched off in another site, and a couple of people told me they'd tried to sign-up weeks ago, but it "all went wrong". They were registered, but had thought the process failed because they got no standard email. Vanilla 2 has a 'Confirm Email' role, but it appears to be useless..?
Just my thoughts, but I feel development on the basic features which are and should be going into the core need doing before docs for plugin writers. No finished chassis, nowhere solid to put the engine and other parts, right..?
I truly think that small incremental improvements to the wiki framework (along with putting it up on github) will help to promote documentation. Though i due understand your point of .. "at least until more people from the community understand how & why things are done the way they are in the framework." ... To have the community assist with writing doc's, you need as you've pointed out individuals that are extremely knowledgeable with the framework itself, if not its wasted man power.
Comments
Do you think the availability, route to gain access, and the functionality of the wiki software used to host the documentations portion of the site is a contributing aspect?
theoretically speaking, would a framework similar to the functionality of MediaWiki inhibit more activity and productivity in our wiki environment?
On the other hand, our old wiki (a traditional one) ended up taking a lot of time to manage because while the community contributed quite a bit, there was a lot of destruction that happened there as well. At this point I think the onus is on us to complete a first draft of the documentation - at least until more people from the community understand how & why things are done the way they are in the framework.
One real bugbear for me and my soon to be users is the fact that they won't get an email confirming they've signed-up correctly (ie., using the right email address). As an example, I left this switched off in another site, and a couple of people told me they'd tried to sign-up weeks ago, but it "all went wrong". They were registered, but had thought the process failed because they got no standard email. Vanilla 2 has a 'Confirm Email' role, but it appears to be useless..?
Just my thoughts, but I feel development on the basic features which are and should be going into the core need doing before docs for plugin writers. No finished chassis, nowhere solid to put the engine and other parts, right..?