User talk:Tstaerk - Revision history

AaronPeterson: /* KDE on virtual machine */ new section

2010-07-29T09:27:22Z

‎KDE on virtual machine: new section

Tstaerk at 07:26, 26 September 2008

2008-09-26T07:26:16Z

Dhaumann: more thoughts...

2008-09-24T22:39:06Z

more thoughts...

Tstaerk at 12:09, 24 September 2008

2008-09-24T12:09:11Z

Tstaerk at 12:08, 24 September 2008

2008-09-24T12:08:24Z

Dhaumann: New page: Please use subpages on techbase, also for tutorials like kioslaves. Thanks. --~~~~

2008-09-23T22:00:38Z

New page: Please use subpages on techbase, also for tutorials like kioslaves. Thanks. --~~~~

New page

Please use subpages on techbase, also for tutorials like kioslaves. Thanks. --[[User:Dhaumann|Dhaumann]] 00:00, 24 September 2008 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:27, 29 July 2010
Line 13:		Line 13:

	::: thanks for your opinion Dominik, accepted. --[[User:Tstaerk\|Tstaerk]] 09:26, 26 September 2008 (CEST)		::: thanks for your opinion Dominik, accepted. --[[User:Tstaerk\|Tstaerk]] 09:26, 26 September 2008 (CEST)
		+
		+	== KDE on virtual machine ==
		+
		+	Tstaerk, thanks for writing that article, it was the one I chose for my first attempt to build KDE. I am wondering if we could break it into smaller articles where the main one lists how to do the virtual machine and discusses what build options to use, and then another on installing it as root... ( I didn't see any other articles on that) Mostly, I chose your version because it doesn't have the cs and cd aliases.--[[User:AaronPeterson\|AaronPeterson]] 09:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:26, 26 September 2008
Line 11:		Line 11:

	:: Maybe you even have some points here, yes. But we've initially discussed about this already: MediaWiki is flat, but we need a more structured approach. Using categories is simply not enough for adding a structure. Or let me put it in different words: Everyone usually uses the subpage-structure for new content. And it works really well so far. That's also how it works on UserBase, at least to some degree. It does not help if we change this approach now, a year too late. I think there are other valid reasons to use the subpages (e.g. you can write scripts that export the content into a real structure with parent-child relation, would help to migrate to e.g. another wiki). So basically it works for everyone. Before we change this now let's discuss this on kde-www. I for once think it's counterproductive to introduce random other concepts. --[[User:Dhaumann\|Dhaumann]] 00:39, 25 September 2008 (CEST)		:: Maybe you even have some points here, yes. But we've initially discussed about this already: MediaWiki is flat, but we need a more structured approach. Using categories is simply not enough for adding a structure. Or let me put it in different words: Everyone usually uses the subpage-structure for new content. And it works really well so far. That's also how it works on UserBase, at least to some degree. It does not help if we change this approach now, a year too late. I think there are other valid reasons to use the subpages (e.g. you can write scripts that export the content into a real structure with parent-child relation, would help to migrate to e.g. another wiki). So basically it works for everyone. Before we change this now let's discuss this on kde-www. I for once think it's counterproductive to introduce random other concepts. --[[User:Dhaumann\|Dhaumann]] 00:39, 25 September 2008 (CEST)
		+
		+	::: thanks for your opinion Dominik, accepted. --[[User:Tstaerk\|Tstaerk]] 09:26, 26 September 2008 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:39, 24 September 2008
Line 9:		Line 9:
	:*** tutorial		:*** tutorial
	:Having the structure in the name would mean you have to change every article name if you want to change the structure. Even worse, there may be different structures in one wiki. Imagine someone writing a second main page named "KDE by technologies". One sub-topic would be kioslaves. The breathtaking strength of a mediawiki is that every article can define a structure on its own, the only given structure being the categories. Having said this, I never find my articles after they got moved - just because other people have a structure in mind that is different from mine. I can give my articles names that fit into this wiki's structure but I would find it sad. --[[User:Tstaerk\|Tstaerk]] 14:08, 24 September 2008 (CEST)		:Having the structure in the name would mean you have to change every article name if you want to change the structure. Even worse, there may be different structures in one wiki. Imagine someone writing a second main page named "KDE by technologies". One sub-topic would be kioslaves. The breathtaking strength of a mediawiki is that every article can define a structure on its own, the only given structure being the categories. Having said this, I never find my articles after they got moved - just because other people have a structure in mind that is different from mine. I can give my articles names that fit into this wiki's structure but I would find it sad. --[[User:Tstaerk\|Tstaerk]] 14:08, 24 September 2008 (CEST)
		+
		+	:: Maybe you even have some points here, yes. But we've initially discussed about this already: MediaWiki is flat, but we need a more structured approach. Using categories is simply not enough for adding a structure. Or let me put it in different words: Everyone usually uses the subpage-structure for new content. And it works really well so far. That's also how it works on UserBase, at least to some degree. It does not help if we change this approach now, a year too late. I think there are other valid reasons to use the subpages (e.g. you can write scripts that export the content into a real structure with parent-child relation, would help to migrate to e.g. another wiki). So basically it works for everyone. Before we change this now let's discuss this on kde-www. I for once think it's counterproductive to introduce random other concepts. --[[User:Dhaumann\|Dhaumann]] 00:39, 25 September 2008 (CEST)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Please use subpages on techbase, also for tutorials like kioslaves. Thanks. --[[User:Dhaumann|Dhaumann]] 00:00, 24 September 2008 (CEST)
 : I regard this as counter-productive. Here is why: You can change a work like a diploma thesis or a wiki from one structure to the other. Changing the structure means you change the headings and by this, you provide a difference cognitive approach to the topic. E.g. at the moment we have:
-* KDE
+:* KDE
-** tutorials
+:** tutorials
-*** kioslaves
+:*** kioslaves
-We could also have
+:We could also have
-* KDE
+:* KDE
-** kioslaves
+:** kioslaves
-*** tutorial
+:*** tutorial
-Having the structure in the name would mean you have to change every article name if you want to change the structure. Even worse, there may be different structures in one wiki. Imagine someone writing a second main page named "KDE by technologies". One sub-topic would be kioslaves. The breathtaking strength of a mediawiki is that every article can define a structure on its own, the only given structure being the categories. Having said this, I never find my articles after they got moved - just because other people have a structure in mind that is different from mine. I can give my articles names that fit into this wiki's structure but I would find it sad. --[[User:Tstaerk|Tstaerk]] 14:08, 24 September 2008 (CEST)
+:Having the structure in the name would mean you have to change every article name if you want to change the structure. Even worse, there may be different structures in one wiki. Imagine someone writing a second main page named "KDE by technologies". One sub-topic would be kioslaves. The breathtaking strength of a mediawiki is that every article can define a structure on its own, the only given structure being the categories. Having said this, I never find my articles after they got moved - just because other people have a structure in mind that is different from mine. I can give my articles names that fit into this wiki's structure but I would find it sad. --[[User:Tstaerk|Tstaerk]] 14:08, 24 September 2008 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 24 September 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Please use subpages on techbase, also for tutorials like kioslaves. Thanks. --[[User:Dhaumann\|Dhaumann]] 00:00, 24 September 2008 (CEST)		Please use subpages on techbase, also for tutorials like kioslaves. Thanks. --[[User:Dhaumann\|Dhaumann]] 00:00, 24 September 2008 (CEST)
		+	: I regard this as counter-productive. Here is why: You can change a work like a diploma thesis or a wiki from one structure to the other. Changing the structure means you change the headings and by this, you provide a difference cognitive approach to the topic. E.g. at the moment we have:
		+	* KDE
		+	** tutorials
		+	*** kioslaves
		+	We could also have
		+	* KDE
		+	** kioslaves
		+	*** tutorial
		+	Having the structure in the name would mean you have to change every article name if you want to change the structure. Even worse, there may be different structures in one wiki. Imagine someone writing a second main page named "KDE by technologies". One sub-topic would be kioslaves. The breathtaking strength of a mediawiki is that every article can define a structure on its own, the only given structure being the categories. Having said this, I never find my articles after they got moved - just because other people have a structure in mind that is different from mine. I can give my articles names that fit into this wiki's structure but I would find it sad. --[[User:Tstaerk\|Tstaerk]] 14:08, 24 September 2008 (CEST)