Moving KDE Connect out of playground

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dimarts, 15 de setembre de 2015, a les 08:01:44, Albert Vaca va escriure:
> I don't think that having "descriptive documentation" (more about this
> later) is that important nowadays, and IMO users will likely google for
> help way before they use the help button when they find issues. Since most
> people I talked to in Randa agreed with me on this, I'm a bit surprised to
> find that you want to enforce this as a strong requirement. 

He doesn't want to enforce this as a strong requirement. It is just another of 
the requirement listed on our list of requirements.

> IMO, the kind of documentation that users need is not a list of every
> button in the KCM with a redundant description like the one we provide
> (probably because most projects write it just to meet the requirement), but
> instead answers to questions like "I see error X, what to do?". And this
> kind of help is easier to find online, in wikis, forums, etc. than in the
> static documentation we provide.

People need both, documentation that drives them through the crucial/hard 
parts of the UI and support forums for when something goes wrong, they're not 
exclusive.

> Leaving aside the utility of having docs, they are yet another moving piece
> to maintain and likely to become outdated (eg: "Activity Settings" help
> shows a screenshot from KDE 4), specially in a piece of software in change
> like KDE Connect.

What makes KDE Connect special?

> To put an example of a similar case, Windows 10 completely removed the
> "Help Center" and now it sends you online to the MS site if you need help.

Meaning you're screwed if you don't have internet access \o/

> Why don't we move our docs to the userbase wiki, and make it an open and
> live thing that users can update (ala Arch Linux wiki)? If there are no
> objections, I could start a page for KDE Connect there and make the help
> button in the KCM link to it. Also, since right now we don't have any
> numbers around how many poeple uses our help, moving it to the web would
> give us some nice analytics around it for free.

Because as well as the internet being awesome it also sucks, if you go to 
https://userbase.kde.org/Okular [1] we recommed removing ~/.cups/lpoptions if 
you have problems printing, sure it says "the file was corrupt", but how many 
of our users are able to diferentiate a corrupt lpoptions from a non corrupt 
one (i can't)?

I've let it there as a testimony of the dark side of wikis.

Cheers,
  Albert

[1] a page that has less content and is generally worse than 
https://okular.kde.org/ that i still don't understand why we need, but that's 
a discussion for a different day

> 
> Albert