From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Hendy Subject: Re: Suggestion: Stackoverflow for Orgmode Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:39:20 -0500 Message-ID: References: <81livt1e3c.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:32836) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QjYrv-0007Yt-Tf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 11:39:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QjYrq-0000jU-G1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 11:39:27 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:45658) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QjYrq-0000jF-1h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 11:39:22 -0400 Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so737516ewy.0 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 08:39:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Rainer M Krug Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Thomas Renkert On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Rainer M Krug wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Thomas Renkert > wrote: >> >> Jambunathan K gmail.com> writes: >> >> > >> > The biggest diasadvantage would be fragmentation of information. >> > >> > All information needs to have authoritative sources and archives. I >> > believe the info manual, GNU mailing list and the Orgmode.org domain (= of >> > which Worg is but a part) are the right place for such archival >> > references. >> >> Sure. But reading the manual from a to z or searching the mailing list f= or >> the >> right line of elisp is sometimes very slow if you need a quick solution.= I >> am by >> no means suggesting that we should give up the established ways of >> archiving >> information or discussion, though. >> >> I simply think that something like "ask.orgmode.org" with a >> stackexchange-like >> interface could be very helpful for a larger portion of users. >> >> It may happen that redundant information is produced by this idea but I >> think it >> will make orgmode more usable and less intimidating for new users. >> Something >> similar has happened before: the orgguide was Carsten's solution for the >> complex >> 200+ pages of the original manual. >> >> Besides I find that useful information is already pretty much fragmented >> across >> the threads of this mailing list (there is also a lot of bugfixing, >> regression >> reports and feature request going on). >> >> Sure, the knowledge is there somewhere but it would be nice to see what >> works >> and what is useful without having to try everything for yourself. >> >> >> >> > I don't think anyone would object to having a secondary marketplace fo= r >> > trading of orgmode related tips and tricks. >> >> >> My question is if anyone on this list would actively participate to get = it >> off >> the ground. And I think that hosting it on the orgmode.org-server would >> make a >> lot of sense. >> >> Is somebody here interested in starting this? >> >> > > Not starting - but I think it is a really good idea. > Nothing against worg (an absolutely fantastic resource) - but I consider = the > way that worg is edited as more static then a dynamic FAQ page, which thi= s > would result in if I understand correctly. > I would definitely add to it. I agree that this should not replace any of > the great resources of org, but it could supplement as a more dynamic for= mat > then worg, but more structured then a mailing list. I'd definitely participate. I keep an "emacs" label in gmail with the mailing list items where I've specifically had a question resolved. I have to refer to them often. Sometimes my searches for the mailing list exchange I *know* happened result in diddly because I just can't remember the title of the email dialog. I think something like SE would be fantastic, and in my opinion is a much more robust than mailing lists *once the answer is determined.* Mailing lists are great for hashing out discussions and getting input... but I think a more concrete (but still modify-able) repository would be better once a tangible outcome from the mailing list has resulted. Honestly, I don't see much difference than doing the same thing with a wiki... but SE is infinitely more fun to contribute to. I could see the benefit of SE's multiple answers format as well, since my observation on the mailing list has often been that many users do things differently. I'd be open to starting this in Area51 if there is significant interest. I don't think it's all that difficult and it's fairly self-fulfilling; if users commit/participate... it launches. If not, it won't. John > Cheers, > Rainer > > -- > Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biolog= y, > UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) > > Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology > Stellenbosch University > South Africa > > Tel : =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44 > Cell: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98 > Fax (F): =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44 > > Fax (D): =C2=A0 =C2=A0+49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44 > > email: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Rainer@krugs.de > > Skype: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0RMkrug > >