[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] a call for a better wiki

From: Eric Blossom
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] a call for a better wiki
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:33:41 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:10:34AM -0400, George Nychis wrote:
> Hi all,
> The more I look at our wiki, the more of a problem I think there is. Yes, I 
> understand WE are the creators of the wiki since it's shared, but I think 
> that it could really use an overhaul with some guidance.
> The common argument is that the code is documented, I think this is a good 
> argument in some situations, but there is an overall lack of high level 
> documentation.  For instance, what tools are there for spectrum analysis?  
> How can you simulate the channel?  What is GNU Radio + USRP's bandwidth?  
> How can you use octave with GNU Radio?  What PHY layers are there?  What 
> applications are there?
> I think that Firas' attempt to better build a manual for the code is great, 
> but GNU Radio is still lacking high level documentation.  If you're not 
> looking to build a new block, and you're not looking to install GNU Radio, 
> you're going to have to dig through a massive source tree or ask on the 
> list.  This is why we get the same questions over and over where we provide 
> answers like "look at benchmark_tx.py" or "there's a ton of examples in the 
> code."  Yes, there are a ton of examples, but the size of the branch makes 
> it very difficult for someone new to find appropriate examples.
> We get tons of "new to GNU Radio, where to start?" questions on the mailing 
> list because of this I think.  They've obviously found the wiki since the 
> links to the mailing list are on there.  The guides on the wiki are a bit 
> daunting.
> Thoughts?  I'd be willing to work on a new front page design on a wiki 
> subpage, that if we like we can continue to build upon and eventually 
> overwrite the current front page.
> Then, as we get questions to the list we realize what kind of documentation 
> we're missing.  And instead of always repeating ourselves on the list, it 
> might be helpful to write the answer somewhere in the wiki and then respond 
> with that wiki link.  It would seriously help build the wiki.
> - George

George,  I agree with the part about the missing overview does.
However, I don't think the problem's really the front page, it's the stuff
that's missing behind it.  You could link to the not-yet-written
overview stuff from the Documentation: list on the main page.

If you're game, why don't you start on the "high level overview" or
"where to start" or whatever you'd like to call it.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]