I’ve been working on a micro.blog wiki. It’s a slow proccess, which I mentioned more in detail on my blog.
As of now, the wiki (which is hosted on Gitlab) is a general place where I keep other stuff, but I’m going to clean it up. The micro.blog section can be found here. The wiki itself is just the index.html file (not including the images) and can be downloaded without cloning the whole repository.
My goal is to keep updating this wiki as I can, especially as more features are added to micro.blog. I’m working from my own knowledge, and I’m definitely not an expert, so it would be best if someone can review it at some point…?
I know what I’m asking may raise an eyebrow or two. I’m not expecting anyone to add more work to their load and look up at a wiki I felt like doing out of nowhere. So, this is my first question, if this is a good way to do it, is there a better way to approach this which might work more in line with what we do in MB… please, let me know. I just too initiative because I didn’t see something like that yet, in the two years I worked on it (with a huge gap in the middle).
I will need some help with mostly reviewing some parts and answering questions. For exmaple, this article is going to be split 3 into sections, which follow the three main sections of the navigation pane in mb to the left on the web interface. The question is, why are these devided to these groups, and why three sections? What’s the idea behind those?
Going forward, I will have more questions. I can organize them in an emails on a weekly basis, or something that makes more sense to whoever feel like they want to help. I don’t mind reaching out and scheduling something more like a 1:1 if that works too, I’ve been doing this sort of thing for work for a couple of years so I’m no stranger to the process of writing these sort of documentations.
So… what do you think? Is there interest? Is it too much for now?
Thanks!
)
). This kind of reminds me of 
Loura