Re: Mass deletion is not an improvement in organization

On Monday 2008-08-04 01:06 -0400, Eric Shepherd wrote:
> As I understand it, everything that's been deleted has been archived,  
> and just because it's gone right now doesn't necessarily mean it's not  
> going to be put back later.  It's part of a process.  We talked about  
> it at length at the Summit, and I think the plan is a good one, it's  
> just going to be inconvenient for some folks while it's ongoing.

Does this "archiving" have any advantages?  It has plenty of
disadvantages.

-David

> On Aug 4, 2008, at 12:59 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> 
> > I've been a little concerned (out of the corner of my eye) about the
> > "reorganize www.mozilla.org" project for a while; I was worried
> > something like this:
> >  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=446213
> > would happen.  Now it has.
> >
> > While improvements in the organization of our documentation are a
> > good thing, "let's delete everything since we can't deal with it"
> > (or break links to everything, which is pretty much the same thing)
> > is not an improvement.   When pages are moved, redirects should be
> > added.  And changes being made on the presumption that content is
> > obsolete should not occur without at least a good-faith effort to
> > determine whether it is in fact obsolete.
> >
> > This change is extremely misguided and should be reverted.
> >
> > -David
> >
> > -- 
> > L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
> > Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > dev-documentation mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-documentation
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dev-documentation mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-documentation

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/