Magnus Enger <magnus@enger.priv.no> wrote:
I don't think the layout of the RFCs is clear enough as it is, all of these pages seem (at first glance) to be doing some of the same things: http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Category:RFCs http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Category:RFCs:for_3.2 http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Category:3.2
I agree with this and posted something similar myself about Category:Serials and Category:RFCs compared to the proposed Category:Serials_RFCs.
And how do you find out which RFCs have sponsors, which are under active development etc?
Search bugzilla enh tickets. But, as noted, bugzilla needs some tidying.
*** Editing and "cataloguing" RFCs
For another project I have used the "Semantic Mediawiki" (http://semantic-mediawiki.org/) family of extensions to MediaWiki, and I think it/they might help with making our RFCs easier to interact with.
I'm reluctant to see our wiki become even more stuck in mediawikisms. I remain hopeful that dissatisfaction with mediawiki and a return to something which uses an easier wiki markup will happen one day. So, is this possible another way? [...]
* Provide a "standard" comment form as an alternative to the "Talk" page (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ArticleComments)
That reminds me: if I'm watching an RFC page, will I be told about activity on the related Talk page? If not, wouldn't it be better if people just edited the RFC and we switched off Talk pages? Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. Past Koha Release Manager (2.0), LMS programmer, statistician, webmaster. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for Koha work http://www.software.coop/products/koha