Right now, we're all working very hard to get the site to where we want it to be. This is good.
Six months from now, I would like to us to be in a position that no one person is critical to maintenance/evolution/improvement of the site. Take a moment to think about how to set up the site so that any of us could take a year to go to the South Sea Islands...
- We certainly don't want to write/be writing all the text on the site ourselves.
- What things must we write ourselves? (We certainly have to handle the site organization, top-level pages, Flashing instructions, importing ToH data, set up ToH display... What else?)
- How much can we rely on people (outside this core team) to continue to add value/knowledge to the site? (Adding a device through the ToH machinery makes its presence known automatically. That's good.)
- How can we encourage new members to add data about devices, about packages, etc. so the site improves organically?
- Is the core team doing a lot of work (or setting up a system to handle a lot of data) to produce pages that aren't absolutely needed, or don't improve the signal-to-noise ratio? For example:
- As @bobafetthotmail pointed out, the quality of Packages is wildly variable. Some are useful, some are documented, some are neither. I worry that automating the display of all the packages just hides good ones amongst the rest. I would say it's better to encourage people (the package authors, or other motivated individuals) to create HOWTO pages (a la OpenWrt) that do a good job of describing the package. We can then link to those articles from a top-level HOWTO pages.
- I will confess that I don't fully understand the Architecture descriptions, but I don't see the use case for those pages. (Maybe I just need to read more carefully...)
Thanks for listening.