|
Size: 4175
Comment:
|
Size: 4498
Comment: move wiki changes into separate page
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| == News / Changes == * [[Date(2002-12-13T03:32:56)]] - updated to CVS current (rev 1.166) * [[Date(2002-11-21T06:16:54)]] - updated to CVS current (rev 1.163) * [[Date(2002-11-06T22:40:50)]] - You can now refer to PEPs like so: '''`PEP:0123`''' -> PEP:0123 * [[Date(2002-08-02T00:19:27)]] - Outgoing mail works now |
## page was renamed from WikiTasks |
| Line 10: | Line 5: |
| * Decide explicitly a convention for page deletion for unpriviliged users. (see below) | |
| Line 12: | Line 6: |
| * Need to create a discussion / ask for help section(s) * Possibly software, documentation and community should have their own head pages |
* Need to create a discussion / ask for help section(s). * Theme-related suggestions by LionKimbro <<DateTime(2006-03-25T16:48:34Z)>>: * Replace current icons with more common images - for example, current edit icon `python.org/img/moin-edit.png` is hard to associate with action * If possible, make the icons text, instead of icons? * "Toggle Line Numbers" draws way too much attention to itself; ''Especially'' when you have only 2 or 3 lines of code! Remove it entirely, or make it much smaller, or (whatever.) * Or use `numbers=disable` in the code regions. -- PaulBoddie <<DateTime(2009-12-09T17:07:42+0100)>> * Bullet point items are spread too far apart. Less white space above and below them. * If I could, I'd make the top bar half as tall as it is. * I'd try to find a way to either (A) eliminate the sidebar, or (B) make it editable. That way, regulars could maintain it. (ex: see [[http://www.communitywiki.org/en/FrontPage|the CommunityWiki SideBar,]] which [[http://www.communitywiki.org/cw?action=edit;id=SideBar|is editable]]) == News / Changes == * [[PythonWikiChanges]] |
| Line 18: | Line 23: |
| Well, this is hardly surprising in an English wiki. You can use full http links, though. -- JürgenHermann [[DateTime(2002-07-26T02:01:40)]] | Well, this is hardly surprising in an English wiki. You can use full http links, though. -- JürgenHermann <<DateTime(2002-07-26T02:01:40)>> |
| Line 20: | Line 25: |
| ''I wasn't surprised, but I was thinking of adding ISBN.de http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/ to intermap.txt (now that I found how ISBN works).'' -- DanielDittmar [[DateTime(2002-07-26T21:14:18)]] | ''I wasn't surprised, but I was thinking of adding ISBN.de http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/ to intermap.txt (now that I found how ISBN works).'' -- DanielDittmar <<DateTime(2002-07-26T21:14:18)>> |
| Line 24: | Line 29: |
| What I would like to use this Wiki for is for comparisons between Python packages. Most areas seem to have multiple solutions. Is it very unwiki to impose some structure like I did in WebProgramming and trying to keep it up? GuiProgramming and IntegratingPythonWithOtherLanguages are also candidates for this kind of style. -- DanielDittmar [[DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)]] | What I would like to use this Wiki for is for comparisons between Python packages. Most areas seem to have multiple solutions. Is it very unwiki to impose some structure like I did in WebProgramming and trying to keep it up? GuiProgramming and IntegratingPythonWithOtherLanguages are also candidates for this kind of style. -- DanielDittmar <<DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)>> |
| Line 28: | Line 33: |
| There are areas which could be moved from the regular web site to the wiki, because they live from contributions anyway. Examples would be some of the SpecialInterestGroups or the page listing editors suitable for Python. Real moving implies getting permission from the python.org webmasters, since the HTML page has to be removed, and the links redirected to the wiki pages. Please don't just copy pages w/o informing anyone, and consider how often a page changes (i.e. if there's a real reason to take it into the wiki). ---- Discussions about Python should be held on comp.lang.python and the SIGs, but it is OK to summary those discussions in the wiki. -- DanielDittmar [[DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)]] |
Discussions about Python should be held on comp.lang.python and the SIGs, but it is OK to summarize those discussions in the wiki. -- DanielDittmar <<DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)>> |
| Line 35: | Line 37: |
| That still means that you can capture from news, or from the wiki itself. Both ways are valid, but always refactoring/summarizing is A Good Thing. -- JürgenHermann [[DateTime(2002-07-17T21:24:51)]] | That still means that you can capture from news, or from the wiki itself. Both ways are valid, but always refactoring/summarizing is A Good Thing. -- JürgenHermann <<DateTime(2002-07-17T21:24:51)>> What kind of conversation are we talking about? * Philosophy - I don't care where it goes (usenet, here, C2, elsewhere) * "How does this piece work?" - it works great here "How does this work" has been great. If you need me to back this up for you, I can back it up with many anecdotes; Most of the pages I write here have seen some related action. People tell me that they read and use (and correct) my pages, and it'd be sad to see that come to an end. The only thing that annoys me are pages with questions for names. Instead, the page name should be the name of the piece, and then the question should appear on the page. That is, [[How can "normal" users report bugs in Python or the documentation?]] should be a page called PythonDocumentation, and then the question attached to ''that'' page. -- LionKimbro <<DateTime(2005-09-15T22:31:31Z)>> [[[lwickjr]]: Sorry about that, Lion. :I ] |
| Line 37: | Line 51: |
| I've turned the Python bookstore into a set of pages, starting from the PythonBooks node. Feel free to link to it from the FrontPage. Question: if you look at http://www.amk.ca/bookstore/, you'll notice that there were also lists of non-Python books that were useful, such as XML or database books. This was an effort to capture the community's wisdom about which books were worth reading; is it worth continuing? (I got few suggestions after my initial request, but maybe having the Wiki will change that.) Should I move over the MontyPython books, too? --amk |
I think this Wiki would best serve as continuing from where standard Python documentation left off: showing examples of use, adding information about good packages not existing in the standard distribution, and talking about higher-level stuff like 'tips for parallel processing'. Examples are very important for newcomers, and hey, many people like to learn new things first from examples, and dive into reference when details become important (including me). As for discussing Python in general, I think c.l.p is invaluable and needs no replacement - so I guess I'm along the same lines as DanielDittmar and JürgenHermann. -- EdvardMajakari <<DateTime(2005-09-15T15:14:13Z)>> |
| Line 43: | Line 54: |
| This was posted to the PythonEditors page, where it probably doesn't belong: ''Please!! get a wiki running side-by-side with the docs eg: 1 corresponding wikiable page for every page here in the pydocs. The startup data is simply that of the docs, so just mirror their structure. Then after the wiki docs start offering lots of useful information, the actual doc writers can incorporate this. To summarize, I think python's documentation (like the lib reference) is basically a big melange of api data and some snippets of useful info. This wiki will help replace those places that just use API data to fill up space, and turn it into something better.'' This seems a bit like [the eff-bot guide to] The Standard Python Library? -- -- JohannesGijsbers [[DateTime(2002-10-15T12:02:34)]] |
CategoryPythonWebsite |
Things that need doing, unless they're done
- We need a mission statement on the front page. What it's for, who can/should participate.
- Need to create a discussion / ask for help section(s).
Theme-related suggestions by LionKimbro 2006-03-25 16:48:34:
Replace current icons with more common images - for example, current edit icon python.org/img/moin-edit.png is hard to associate with action
- If possible, make the icons text, instead of icons?
"Toggle Line Numbers" draws way too much attention to itself; Especially when you have only 2 or 3 lines of code! Remove it entirely, or make it much smaller, or (whatever.)
Or use numbers=disable in the code regions. -- PaulBoddie 2009-12-09 16:07:42
- Bullet point items are spread too far apart. Less white space above and below them.
- If I could, I'd make the top bar half as tall as it is.
I'd try to find a way to either (A) eliminate the sidebar, or (B) make it editable. That way, regulars could maintain it. (ex: see the CommunityWiki SideBar, which is editable)
News / Changes
Discussion
Unfortunately, the ISBN links point to amazon.com, not amazon.de -- DanielDittmar
Well, this is hardly surprising in an English wiki. You can use full http links, though. -- JürgenHermann 2002-07-26 02:01:40
I wasn't surprised, but I was thinking of adding ISBN.de http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/ to intermap.txt (now that I found how ISBN works). -- DanielDittmar 2002-07-26 21:14:18
Some ideas about the aims of this wiki:
What I would like to use this Wiki for is for comparisons between Python packages. Most areas seem to have multiple solutions. Is it very unwiki to impose some structure like I did in WebProgramming and trying to keep it up? GuiProgramming and IntegratingPythonWithOtherLanguages are also candidates for this kind of style. -- DanielDittmar 2002-07-15 02:21:48
Imposing (widely accepted) structure is not unwiki, actually it is a goal of refactoring. Otherwise, you end up with a spaghetti wiki, i.e. chaos. -- jh
Discussions about Python should be held on comp.lang.python and the SIGs, but it is OK to summarize those discussions in the wiki. -- DanielDittmar 2002-07-15 02:21:48
The entire point of a wiki is to capture discussion in such a way that it will be remembered IMO - dhl 20020716
That still means that you can capture from news, or from the wiki itself. Both ways are valid, but always refactoring/summarizing is A Good Thing. -- JürgenHermann 2002-07-17 21:24:51
What kind of conversation are we talking about?
- Philosophy - I don't care where it goes (usenet, here, C2, elsewhere)
- "How does this piece work?" - it works great here
"How does this work" has been great. If you need me to back this up for you, I can back it up with many anecdotes; Most of the pages I write here have seen some related action. People tell me that they read and use (and correct) my pages, and it'd be sad to see that come to an end.
The only thing that annoys me are pages with questions for names. Instead, the page name should be the name of the piece, and then the question should appear on the page. That is, How can "normal" users report bugs in Python or the documentation? should be a page called PythonDocumentation, and then the question attached to that page.
-- LionKimbro 2005-09-15 22:31:31 [lwickjr: Sorry about that, Lion. :I ]
I think this Wiki would best serve as continuing from where standard Python documentation left off: showing examples of use, adding information about good packages not existing in the standard distribution, and talking about higher-level stuff like 'tips for parallel processing'. Examples are very important for newcomers, and hey, many people like to learn new things first from examples, and dive into reference when details become important (including me). As for discussing Python in general, I think c.l.p is invaluable and needs no replacement - so I guess I'm along the same lines as DanielDittmar and JürgenHermann. -- EdvardMajakari 2005-09-15 15:14:13