First of all, the question linked below is just to illustrate my more general concerns.
After this question Which plugin should I use to get started with Jenkins to manage mainframe components in PDS format? which has a real value for a canonical point of view.
I've the feeling we have a problem trying to create canonical questions.
The problem I see here is that it miss a practical goal. There's no clue of what is intended to do with jenkins, which by nature is very volatile from just linting jobs to Continuous Delivery pipeline.
I assume this is due to the wish to create a canonical question from problems encountered or question we had ourselves and willing to write them in a less 'personal' way so they are useful to more people.
There's others examples which have the same kind of problem in my opinion.
- What is a 'Feature Flag Toggle' and when to use them (or not)? first revision, which has been edited in a better format
- How is Ansible different from simply running a provisioning bash shell in Vagrant? which could be worded differently by taking an actual use case so answers can focus on what gives an advantage over the other and extend on a more generic comparison
- How to design authentication and authorization in micro-services architecture? first revision, which again should be more focused.
- How to design authentication and authorization in micro-services architecture? same as above in its current version, still with a generic goal.
What I fear is that either answers will be very long (if they fit in 30k chars) or that it will attract a bunch of vague answers on what is better to do on answer's author opinion, not exactly addressing the concerns and/or missing part of the question by focusing on only one point.
While we can downvote, and then delete bad answers, this may create a lot of clean up work which would be better spend elsewhere.
So my question is: should we not aim at more focused and practical questions to avoid this ?