| Sylvain Beucler 2006-09-30, 7:34 am |
| On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 09:11:38PM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 04:42:17PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> Hi Sylvain,
> I think that is a great idea but I'd have a few caveats: what if someone
> put malicous code in a page (e.g. the equivilant of 'rm -rf /') and a
> user damaged their system by running it? The current process is not as
> easily updated but its has a high quality review which is good. I'd hope
> for a solution that lets people add new content but maybe have it not
> show up immediatley and have it reviewed like 'sponsored uploads' thus
> ensuring that it meets Debian standards. IIRC there are folks who are
> responsible for Debian web content and Debian user documentation --
> maybe have them involved?
I wonder whether this process is the reason why the information is on
wiki.debian.org in the first place.
This also means that untrusted copy/paste-able code will be put on a
Debian wiki independently of the devref's update process (users
hopelessly like to bypass inconvenient security policies ;)).
Moderation is good indeed. Wikis only suggest distributed 'a
posteriori' moderation instead of centralised 'a priori' moderation.
However, I don't know of a good tool to wiki-ize a document while
keeping to abilities to distribute it offline. CVS had its Texinfo
manual published as a Mediawiki (http://ximbiot.com/cvs/manual/) - I
wonder how/whether they merge it back to Texinfo. Another option may
be a public repository like UnCommon Web's - it's for code though
(http://uncommon-web.com/darcsweb/da...ublic;a=summary)
--
Sylvain
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|