ok, let me see if the ML helps...
what shall we do with computer code? http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Source_code There is still a deletion request on ws.org, it has been there for a long time, and I am not sure what to do...
As a programmer, my opinion is that source code on wikisource is useless. Wikisourceis not a repository for source code, despite its confusing name.
I therefore support deletion.
the only exception would for programs whose interest goes beyond programming (eg quines, or pieces of code that have a historical value)
ThomasV
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 11:44:01PM +0200, thomasV1@gmx.de wrote:
ok, let me see if the ML helps...
what shall we do with computer code? http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Source_code There is still a deletion request on ws.org, it has been there for a long time, and I am not sure what to do...
As a programmer, my opinion is that source code on wikisource is useless. Wikisourceis not a repository for source code, despite its confusing name.
I therefore support deletion.
the only exception would for programs whose interest goes beyond programming (eg quines, or pieces of code that have a historical value)
I agree wholly with that.
ThomasV
Regards, Yann
I am now persuaded that wikisource is not an appropriate repository for source code.
Theo
On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:44:01 +0200 (MEST), thomasV1@gmx.de said:
ok, let me see if the ML helps...
what shall we do with computer code? http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Source_code There is still a deletion request on ws.org, it has been there for a long time, and I am not sure what to do...
As a programmer, my opinion is that source code on wikisource is useless. Wikisourceis not a repository for source code, despite its confusing name.
I therefore support deletion.
the only exception would for programs whose interest goes beyond programming (eg quines, or pieces of code that have a historical value)
ThomasV
-- Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*! "Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
Theo Clarke wrote:
I am now persuaded that wikisource is not an appropriate repository for source code.
Theo
On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:44:01 +0200 (MEST), thomasV1@gmx.de said:
ok, let me see if the ML helps...
what shall we do with computer code? http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Source_code There is still a deletion request on ws.org, it has been there for a long time, and I am not sure what to do...
As a programmer, my opinion is that source code on wikisource is useless. Wikisourceis not a repository for source code, despite its confusing name.
I therefore support deletion.
the only exception would for programs whose interest goes beyond programming (eg quines, or pieces of code that have a historical value)
Although I haven't been active there lately, this is certainly the sort of thing that I would have been happy to be rid of even then. There was enough of a battle to get rid of the Postal/ZIP codes. It really all comes down to the vision that people want to apply to Wikisource. I would hve bee satisfied with having only published works and historical documents, but had to concede that others may have other visions. Since I am not a programmer I had no idea about how to follow what these are about, and my own ignorance alone would not be an adequate criterion for deletion. Cleaning or deleting these is a project which should be led by someone who understands them.
Many of the articles have been there a long time with no further edits other than incidental ones like adding category tags. Toi keep the peace it may be necessary to go through the deletion process one article at a time.
Ec
On 4/29/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Although I haven't been active there lately, this is certainly the sort of thing that I would have been happy to be rid of even then. There was enough of a battle to get rid of the Postal/ZIP codes. It really all comes down to the vision that people want to apply to Wikisource. I would hve bee satisfied with having only published works and historical documents, but had to concede that others may have other visions. Since I am not a programmer I had no idea about how to follow what these are about, and my own ignorance alone would not be an adequate criterion for deletion. Cleaning or deleting these is a project which should be led by someone who understands them.
Many of the articles have been there a long time with no further edits other than incidental ones like adding category tags. Toi keep the peace it may be necessary to go through the deletion process one article at a time.
Ec
Oh, even doing it one article at a time will bring up nasty debates with Wikipedia and Wikibooks. There is no getting around that. But I do agree that they should be gradually phased out, so that links can be corrected/changed and Wikipedians can find alternate places for source code examples.
The same goes for reference material, as well (if the multi-WS decides to nix it--the English sub-domain has chosen to exclude it from the project and will begin phasing it out shortly).
Z
On 4/28/06, thomasV1@gmx.de thomasV1@gmx.de wrote:
ok, let me see if the ML helps...
what shall we do with computer code? http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Source_code There is still a deletion request on ws.org, it has been there for a long time, and I am not sure what to do...
As a programmer, my opinion is that source code on wikisource is useless. Wikisourceis not a repository for source code, despite its confusing name.
I therefore support deletion.
the only exception would for programs whose interest goes beyond programming (eg quines, or pieces of code that have a historical value)
I agree as well. While I have only a very little bit of programming knowledge, it is still quite clear that most of our computer code, such as the pages like "Hello world" are entirely not needed, and don't fit Wikisource's goals as I see them. All the "example" bits of code I say we delete soon. This should not discourage posting code for programs that have been released into the public domain, however--surely Wikisource should carry those. I believe one of the Wolfensteins is in the public domain; having that on WS would be great.
Just wait until we start changing all the links on Wikipedia and Wikibooks that link to the Wikisource source code. It'll be yet another pleasant debate...And while we're talking about source code, what about reference material in general? Like "x to the y places"? It would make sense to nix those as well.
Z
I agree that Wikisource is not a place for this in general. If there will be a code with some historical interest etc., so then we have an exception and the yes, it could stay. But otherwise it would be probably better to have such codes elsewhere, e.g. on Wikibooks. -jkb-
----- Original Message ----- From: thomasV1@gmx.de To: wikisource-l@mail.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 11:44 PM Subject: [Wikisource-l] computer code
: : ok, let me see if the ML helps... : : what shall we do with computer code? : http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Source_code : There is still a deletion request on ws.org, : it has been there for a long time, and I am not : sure what to do... : : As a programmer, my opinion is that source code on : wikisource is useless. Wikisourceis not a repository : for source code, despite its confusing name. : : I therefore support deletion. : : the only exception would for programs whose interest : goes beyond programming (eg quines, or pieces of : code that have a historical value) : : ThomasV : : -- : Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*! : "Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: _______________________________________________ : Wikisource-l mailing list : Wikisource-l@mail.wikimedia.org : http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l :
On 5/3/06, -jkb- -jkb-@web.de wrote:
I agree that Wikisource is not a place for this in general. If there will be a code with some historical interest etc., so then we have an exception and the yes, it could stay. But otherwise it would be probably better to have such codes elsewhere, e.g. on Wikibooks. -jkb-
Actually, WP and WB have many examples of source code. Browsing their pages, they've got entire lists of certain programs (e.g. Hello world) written in over 20 different programming languages (exactly like the source code pages WS has). Really, our content is redundant with theirs, and there really should be no problem in removing all those items from our database.
Z
wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org