Talk:Configuring X
Ack! The Configuring page should really be X:Configuring or X:Configuration instead.
JohnMG 15:34, Mar 25, 2004 (EST)
Ack! Ack! There's actually a Configuring_X page, and Configuring is just a link to it!
- Oh the tangled wiki we weave, ...
JohnMG 15:38, Mar 25, 2004 (EST)
Yeah, the redirect from configuring should probably be removed and all pages linking to it fixed. Not sure what to put on the page though... since 'configuring' pages seem to usually be on the page with the software package name (and there are a couple of 'using...' 'installing...' etc pages).
Ohh, I'd also suggest moving this page "Configuring X" to "Configuring XFree86", specially with the current rise of interest in alternative X servers :)
Jor 20:42, Mar 25, 2004 (EST)
Just talking about this elsewhere. Hm. The problem with a lot of the pages here is that I think we want to basically be defining nouns. 'Configuring' shouldn't exist at all, just on grammatical grounds. A redirect seemed to be the change that would have the least impact and still fix it. Or sweep it under the rug, as the case may be. But the same goes for this one. And each article really has to be self-sufficient. If it's not, why is it split off in the first place? If it's not, it should be a section of some other article.
We seem to have an aversion to long articles but, with a ToC, I don't see the problem with having an 'XFree86' article that includes a 'configuration' section. There's no such thing as 'configuring' unless someone wanted to create an article whose entire contents were
Configuring is the process of supplying programs with needed information and/or default behaviors.
(Followed by a 'See also' list several miles long that duplicated the 'Applications' and 'Commands' sections.) :)
This is one of those 'my two cents'. ;)
Digiot 21:04, Mar 25, 2004 (EST)
Well, I see you point on self-sufficient pages, but following you thought on the XFree86 page would mean it gets sections for every bit of possible configuration issue with it. That will become pretty huge, e.g. it would include the content of Using multiple monitors with XFree86,OpenGL,Installing_NVIDIA_drivers,Configuring TV out,Configuring mice (Serial, PS/2, USB),Configuring keyboards and many many not yet written content. Not that I mind big pages (my download speeds from this server seems OK), but the TOC itself would span multiple pages and don't even think about the indendation levels :) I kinda like seperation of pages with just info/definitions/what-is-it stuff and pages with more using/doing/howto like stuff. And that's my 'two cents' :) Jor 21:29, Mar 25, 2004 (EST)
True. A single XFree86 wouldn't be workable - entire books (series of books) have been written and don't scratch the surface. But a general overview and specific topics make more sense. An 'X configuration' section in 'XFree86' which explains the bare concepts - what tools? xf86cfg, etc. What files? XF86Config, etc. Then specfics spun out from there. 'X Configuration' seems to land in that hazy 'in between' area. Every topic you listed should maybe go on this page rather than X, whereas the X article would just explain the whole concept of the networked GUI. And then this page has the same problem of being huge. Or of being just another link to go through from the X page to the 'I need to get my mouse working' part. I dunno. There's no way one way to do it and any approach is going to have upsides and downsides, I guess.
Digiot 23:15, Mar 25, 2004 (EST)
Okay. The 'X Window System' tree has always been kind of weird on the 'Applications' page. What it is now is
* X Window System
o General Tips
o Programming
o Configuring
o Screenshots
o Remote Desktop Connection
But RDC is a separate topic and basically repeats what should be found under other 'Application' or 'Command' pages. Everything on it is a program. And 'telnet' has exactly zero to do with X, besides. Screenshots is more a 'Common Task', wherever that went. Programming in X belongs in 'Programming'. No user of X cares about programming and every programmer of X is going to be wandering around in 'Programming' anyway. There's no such thing as a 'General Tip'. There is no /bin/general. Find the right niche for those.
That leaves 'X Window System' itself, and 'Configuring X'. So merge a generic 'Configuration' section into a general 'X Window System' and turn the 'Applications' entry into a single line.
Then create a reference structure where the key 'Installing nVidia drivers' stuff is linked to the generic 'X Window System' under the 'Video' section or whatever.
Kind of like how Security is, but with explanatory text knitting together the link sections. Or something.
Or not. :)
Digiot 23:32, Mar 25, 2004 (EST)
Well I've tried what you suggested, I've moved/itegrated most of the content of this page to XFree86 and linked to all the other related pages there. I'm still not sure if I like it on 1 big page like this and what to do with distribution specific configuration. I'll just see and wait what happens with it and other big topics on this wiki. But this page itself should probably be deleted, or re-directed :/ Jor 15:17, Mar 29, 2004 (EST)
- Looking at it, I'm not sure if I like it either. :) I touched it up a bit. Quite a bit could removed without actually removing any information. However, it's either got too much text for a links page or too many links for an actual article. That starts at XFree86, too. It seems like a double-approach would be best. We want people to hit the front page and check out applications, and then see X and then learn about XFree86 specifically, but still with an overview approach. And then specific links to specific things. That way it's hierarchical. But the wiki's not primarily a hierarchy in use, right? So if people are wandering around from link to link, they can ignore the top level pages and just get small solid articles. Maybe? So I like the idea of a few top level things being mostly link lists that people can follow 'down' to specific information - while the articles below that level all link to each other with details. So it's actually starting at the Applications page and working on down that could all be revised. Or just leave the whole thing alone. I agree with the wait and see. And maybe wait a bit before doing anything with this page, too. If it turns out it should be put back, it's only one thing to put back. Digiot 18:08, Mar 29, 2004 (EST)
--
This page is pretty specific to XFree86. How long until someone takes a look at x.org [1] and writes configuration instructions for it? Many new linux releases are using it. I'm willing to do it, but it won't be until early July. --Snags 11:17, Jun 17, 2004 (EDT)