Difference between revisions of "Talk:From User to Root"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::Which makes it even better. Always preferable to approach the void. But wouldn't a more descriptive title be best? --[[User:Baxrob|Baxrob]] 17:37, 19 Aug 2005 (PDT) | ::Which makes it even better. Always preferable to approach the void. But wouldn't a more descriptive title be best? --[[User:Baxrob|Baxrob]] 17:37, 19 Aug 2005 (PDT) | ||
| − | Why? You get here by going to Classes, which has a description of what it is. It's a catchy title, and if you've gone through the command line class, you should understand it when explained (if the # were there. if you can help me put the # back that would be exciting.) --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] | + | :::Why? You get here by going to Classes, which has a description of what it is. It's a catchy title, and if you've gone through the command line class, you should understand it when explained (if the # were there. if you can help me put the # back that would be exciting.) --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] |
| + | |||
| + | ::::(hope you don't mind me indenting your comment..) Yes, it's catchy. I like it. And maybe the meaning would have been clear if the hashmark would render in the page title (no go with %23 either - expect it can't be done, since # in a url normally delimits page-sections (css/DOM id attributes), and mediawiki's parsing is not too sophisticated anyway (question-marks in titles also cause havoc)). But: 1) there's a built in assumption of fore-knowledge. That might be okay if you are *sure* that you will only ever expect those who know enough to infer the meaning of the title to have a need to refer to it, but it seems too local to the inital intended purpose of this document. If this wiki grows, as it should, or people come here by their own circuitous routes (which a wiki should welcome, i think), there is no way to know what other, unintended link in what unforseen chain it might fulfill (I am thinking it may fulfill: a definition of the intended meaning of 'sysadmin' relative to freegeek and its spawn). 2) if the idea is to open-source information, a) making people feel stupid is sorta anathema, and b) clarity is .. the grail. But, yes, granted, it is catchy and clever and sharp and sporty and sleek and, basically, all around cute. :-P -- [[User:Baxrob|Baxrob]] 14:38, 20 Aug 2005 (PDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | So ... i'm top-posting by date, preserving bottom-posting within the thread ... think this is coherent. (I don't know what precedent has been set.. where's a page with lots of discussion?) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Qua: "...everything you need to know to become a competent system administrator" of what system? Because i'm thinking of this page as potentially defining this, for the sake of propagation... and, if there is this rumor of not having enough system administration help there, for the sake of basic system upkeep, no? This looks friendly to me: [[Wikipedia:sysadmin]] -- [[User:Baxrob|Baxrob]] 14:38, 20 Aug 2005 (PDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :(MW prefers consistent bottom posting, so i reverted the order. -- [[User:Baxrob|Baxrob]] 00:53, 21 Aug 2005 (PDT)) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm still getting a feel for how you all are using categories here. Wonder if [[:Category:Command line]] is really worth a category, and whether this class/outline fits under [[:Category:Coders]] in yer ole thar ontology. --[[User:Baxrob|Baxrob]] 14:38, 20 Aug 2005 (PDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
Latest revision as of 00:53, 21 August 2005
i feel dumb; don't understand the title of this page. --Ideath 13:34, 19 Aug 2005 (PDT)
- Mediawiki dropped the # from the end of the title. It's supposed to be: From $ to # ($ is the user prompt, # is the root prompt). --Jeff 16:34, 19 Aug 2005 (PDT)
- Which makes it even better. Always preferable to approach the void. But wouldn't a more descriptive title be best? --Baxrob 17:37, 19 Aug 2005 (PDT)
- Why? You get here by going to Classes, which has a description of what it is. It's a catchy title, and if you've gone through the command line class, you should understand it when explained (if the # were there. if you can help me put the # back that would be exciting.) --Jeff
- (hope you don't mind me indenting your comment..) Yes, it's catchy. I like it. And maybe the meaning would have been clear if the hashmark would render in the page title (no go with %23 either - expect it can't be done, since # in a url normally delimits page-sections (css/DOM id attributes), and mediawiki's parsing is not too sophisticated anyway (question-marks in titles also cause havoc)). But: 1) there's a built in assumption of fore-knowledge. That might be okay if you are *sure* that you will only ever expect those who know enough to infer the meaning of the title to have a need to refer to it, but it seems too local to the inital intended purpose of this document. If this wiki grows, as it should, or people come here by their own circuitous routes (which a wiki should welcome, i think), there is no way to know what other, unintended link in what unforseen chain it might fulfill (I am thinking it may fulfill: a definition of the intended meaning of 'sysadmin' relative to freegeek and its spawn). 2) if the idea is to open-source information, a) making people feel stupid is sorta anathema, and b) clarity is .. the grail. But, yes, granted, it is catchy and clever and sharp and sporty and sleek and, basically, all around cute. :-P -- Baxrob 14:38, 20 Aug 2005 (PDT)
So ... i'm top-posting by date, preserving bottom-posting within the thread ... think this is coherent. (I don't know what precedent has been set.. where's a page with lots of discussion?)
Qua: "...everything you need to know to become a competent system administrator" of what system? Because i'm thinking of this page as potentially defining this, for the sake of propagation... and, if there is this rumor of not having enough system administration help there, for the sake of basic system upkeep, no? This looks friendly to me: Wikipedia:sysadmin -- Baxrob 14:38, 20 Aug 2005 (PDT)
- (MW prefers consistent bottom posting, so i reverted the order. -- Baxrob 00:53, 21 Aug 2005 (PDT))
I'm still getting a feel for how you all are using categories here. Wonder if Category:Command line is really worth a category, and whether this class/outline fits under Category:Coders in yer ole thar ontology. --Baxrob 14:38, 20 Aug 2005 (PDT)