On 9/8/06, Nikolaus Waxweiler <madleser@gmx.de> wrote:
One alternative to having a wiki is having a well-maintained
non-wiki-website, which is hard if you have got few people to do it. If I
was Fedor or any other admin, I wouldn't just give anyone write-access.
Another alternative would be having a CMS, but this wouldn't be much
different, since you have to give people permission manually.
I don't see how restricting write-access even more would help, I think the current state is a pretty good compromise (request-based). For example, I just joined the mailing and I don't really know how to program, so the only way I can help is by helping with documentation on the wiki. If write-access was not given to new people looking to help, someone such as myself would have litteraly been rejected! Which turns down users (which is what I am, a user, not a developer) which in turn pushes developers away... And we're right back to the start again.
I personally like the approach of Amarok. Have the main site be a
bare-bones page with the most relevant stuff on it and link to the wiki
for everything else.
I liked how that looks! Wikipedia does the same thing, at least it looks like it.