How, precisely, can we improve?

Eric Seidel eric at
Tue Sep 27 16:18:36 UTC 2016

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 09:06, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
> Yes, I agree with Michael’s observations in the blog post. However, one
> thing that’s easier about a wiki is that the editing process is much more
> lightweight than making a PR.
> But GitHub has a wonderful feature (that I have rarely used) that
> mitigates this problem. Viewing a file in GitHub offers a little pencil
> icon in the top-right. It allows you to make arbitrary changes in the
> file and then automates the construction of a PR. The owner of the file
> can then accept the PR very, very easily. If the editor has commit
> rights, you can make your edits into a commit right away. No need to
> fork, pull and push.

Indeed, GitHub also supports git-backed wikis, so you can have nicely
rendered and inter-linked pages *and* have the option for web-based or
git-based editing. Though, based on my limited experience with GitHub
wikis, I wonder if they would scale to the size of GHC's wiki..

There's also a tool called gitit ( that
seems to offer the same set of features, but apparently with a more
traditional (and I assume customizable) layout.

I think having the option for simple, immediate edits or peer-reviewed
edits (the peer-review is much more important to me than having an
explicitly file-based system) would be a big win. Perhaps there's even a
trac module that implements something like this? Then we could decouple
it from the question/task of migrating the existing content elsewhere.


More information about the ghc-devs mailing list