Nix Documentation | 435 Members | |
| Discussion about documentation improvements around the Nix ecosystem | 90 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Jan 2024 | ||
In reply to @9999years:matrix.org In 2022 I started with exactly that assessment (which I still share) and with Eelco’s blessing and Tweag’s funding started this: https://github.com/nixos/nix-book It turned out not to be that simple at all. The ecosystem is too large, the spectrum of use cases too wide, and the details too messed up to just sit down and vomit out how to use it properly and then wait for others to fix the typos. In fact, there have been multiple attempts by different people: https://github.com/NixOS/nix.dev/issues/454 | 08:57:02 | |
| Apart from the initial literature survey, I ran a a small usability study: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/usability-studies/21404 and evaluated the community polls: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/2022-nix-survey-results/18983 When the documentation team was founded the current strategy evolved based on the following considerations:
So this is what we did and are still doing, and we’re quite far advanced with improving the documentation relevant for the first couple of weeks using vanilla Nix. I don’t have the numbers to prove it, but from anecdata and heuristics about the types of questions asked on Discourse, I think we managed to substantially reduce the average initial onboarding time and fraction of people who give up before concluding that. | 08:57:23 | |
| And even that took what feels like forever, because we ran into many obstacles that relate to governance issues. The first impressions are highly exposed material and so I have to get change proposals past people who have authority over the pieces in question. That’s another reason why we focus on nix.dev more than anything else: the documentation team has free reign over it (within the constraints of not breaking things that already worked for people). Which means that still, NixOS and Nixpkgs documentation have barely improved in the meantime. We here know all the issues with it, but dealing with them takes time that’s taken away from the original mission. We’re trying to balance that, because not supporting attempts at contributions is of course frustrating for everyone. | 08:57:44 | |
| What we really need are dedicated maintainers for the various sections of the Nixpkgs manual, all of the NixOS manual, and ideally editors for the (upcoming new) Wiki. This stuff is up for grabs, and I’d definitely recommend org owners to hand out commit bits to anyone who demonstrates they understand and subscribe to the general direction we’re taking. So far no one stepped up, and those who considered, reconsidered again after dipping their toes into the intricacies of the stuff actively being worked on. We first have to get the basics right before piling stuff on top. There’s already way too much stuff piled up, and the basics are still not in a great shape. | 08:57:49 | |
| Oof this is a bit long for Matrix.. | 09:42:13 | |
| You're writing entire blog posts! | 09:42:21 | |
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.orgi think we would really benefit from this. it would make it easier for people to contribute across the different projects on the platform, create links when appropriate, etc etc | 09:46:20 | |
btw, we have ~60 prs in nixpkgs that are about documentation, but have no 6.topic: documentation label, including some by mebers of this team. i think it would be helpful to ensure that label is added, so we can triage them instead of letting them rot. | 10:45:02 | |
In reply to @9999years:matrix.orginspired by this | 10:45:34 | |
In reply to @asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk hmm, the label description says "Meta-discussion about documentation and its workflow", so maybe i'm wrong that it should be applied to those prs? should documentation PRs have that label, or not? | 10:50:58 | |
| asymmetric: Sounds like the label description should be updated then :) | 11:16:22 | |
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.orgthing is, we also have a "8.has: documentation` label, which i think gets automatically applied | 11:17:45 | |
| so maybe the topic label is indeed for meta discussions | 11:18:02 | |
| Oh I see | 11:18:07 | |
| I feel like the content vs infra distinction sounds better | 11:19:07 | |
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.orgso are you arguing for changing, or keeping? | 11:21:22 | |
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org* so are you arguing for changing, or keeping, the descriptions? | 11:21:30 | |
| asymmetric: Changing both the label names and descriptions to be more obvious | 12:05:44 | |
From the little I've seen, 6.topic: documentation doesn't have automation around it, so it has to be manually applied, which leads to it not being used enough/appropriately | 12:24:19 | |
| yeah, hence my recommendation to use it. but anyway, the main goal is that we don't forget prs, so really whichever one gets applied most consistently and matches our needs is fine by me | 12:38:03 | |
| Just went through a rabbithole when creating a PR, and have a few questions that I think would be better asked here rather than spending even more time trying to dig things:
| 14:45:38 | |
| no problem's gonna be solved by me bitching in here, sorry, i should have kept it to myself. thanks for the intervention. i'll try to contribute meaningfully and regulate my aversion to various comms styles. | 15:45:20 | |
| I think your contribution was fine and valuable feedback to the team, I wouldn't like to lose out on those kinds of contributions personally | 16:01:12 | |
In reply to @danielsidhion:nixos.devNo idea about the first, but the second one oh no.. | 16:15:33 | |
| Indeed there should be commits to https://github.com/NixOS/nixos-homepage/commits/master/ every day to update the website with the latest versions, but this apparently broke.. | 16:15:58 | |
| Lol: https://github.com/NixOS/nixos-homepage/actions/runs/7496066602/job/20407403287#step:5:12 | 16:16:18 | |
| 16:16:29 | |
| Wait there's not even a deprecation message | 16:19:13 | |
| Wait what, the current latest version is 2.19.2, which does have a deprecation message (tried it locally):
| 16:21:25 | |
| Investigating.. | 16:22:34 | |