You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by chengjh <ch...@apache.org> on 2012/06/05 04:35:54 UTC
Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Hi,
We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
been moved to
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a
new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to
include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
comment...thanks.
--
Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 6/5/12 9:13 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
>> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
>> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
>> been moved to
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a
>> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
>> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
>> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
>> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
>> them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
>> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
>> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
>
> We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home
>
> Here is the history:
>
> The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project
>
> When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created.
> Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to
> Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it.
>
> The two new wikis were:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home This
> was the "community wiki" where anyone could create an account and edit
> content.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This
> wiki was restricted to committers.
>
> The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a
> product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put
> on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do
> much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something
> from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was
> only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under
> ALv2.
>
> If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the
> license issue. And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that
> there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki
> today.
we can put a disclaimer on each existing page where the license
situation is unclear. For all new stuff we require ALv2. We can make
this sure by a clear license info page for future contributions. And
during the registration process for new users we can ask for accepting
the license for new contributions as well to make sure that all new
registered users are aligned.
Existing users can be notified to renew their account and acknowledge
the license change or their account get deleted.
Just an idea
Juergen
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
>> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to
>> include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
>> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
>> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
>> comment...thanks.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jun 5, 2012, at 6:45 PM, Kevin Grignon wrote:
> KG01 - see comments inline.
>
> On Jun 6, 2012, at 3:13 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
>>> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
>>> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
>>> been moved to
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a
>>> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
>>> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
>>> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
>>> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
>>> them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
>>> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
>>> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
>>
>> We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home
>>
>> Here is the history:
>>
>> The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project
>>
>> When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created.
>> Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to
>> Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it.
>>
>> The two new wikis were:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home This
>> was the "community wiki" where anyone could create an account and edit
>> content.
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This
>> wiki was restricted to committers.
>>
>> The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a
>> product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put
>> on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do
>> much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something
>> from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was
>> only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under
>> ALv2.
>>
>> If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the
>> license issue. And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that
>> there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki
>> today.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> KG01 - While I appreciate that wiki-oriented design and development resources are scarce, we should consider forming a swat team to sort this out. As a distributed team we need usable tools and useful info. To help orient readers, and make active versus archival material distinct, we should consider a rapid visual refresh, or some other predominant visual affordable. The current "document: outdated" is not predominant enough.
Rob's description is entirely correct. He does leave out some of the detail which is basically for whatever reason the former Admin of the wiki and forum did not take well to the Apache way. He DID step up and get it migrated and Terry E's effort is much appreciated,
It is good that imacat has stepped up to fulfill the role of sysadmin for the MediaWiki. Anyone else?
I'll add that the OOODEV CWiki has been barely used, it should certainly be dropped and any existing content moved to OOOUSERS
Regards,
Dave
>
>
>>
>>> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
>>> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to
>>> include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
>>> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
>>> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
>>> comment...thanks.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Herbert Duerr wrote:
> Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of
> attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. ...
> Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more
> resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting
> plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that
> really want our project to die and put some effort into it.
I don't really know whether spam attacks are made to deliberately damage
this project or just to spam, but it's simpler to believe they are just
spam.
What is interesting/amusing is that I noticed a consistent pattern of
spam registrations in the OpenOffice and LibreOffice wikis over the last
weeks (i.e., the same extremely long username being registered on one
wiki and, just seconds/minutes later, on the other one).
So at least the two projects have common spammers! Now it would be
really nice to cooperate on fighting spam, since this just involves good
will and common sense and it does not interfere with licenses,
contributor agreements, corporate interests...
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by imacat <im...@mail.imacat.idv.tw>.
On 2012/06/06 19:56, Paulo de Souza Lima said:
> 2012/6/6 Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Herbert Duerr schrieb:
>>
>>> On 06.06.2012 05:57, imacat wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one.
>>>> But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just
>>>> moving.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>> Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of
>>> attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. Please see e.g.
>>> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/w/index.php?**
>>> title=Special:RecentChanges&**limit=500<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=500>
>>>
>>> which shows that most of the changelog entries are caused by these
>>> Annoybots subscribing about 50 dummy users every day.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if this is critical because it could blow up the service
>>> but browsing the recent changes list feels like analyzing the contents
>>> of a garbage bin instead of a "hey these are interesting updates"
>>> moment. Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more
>>> resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting
>>> plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that
>>> really want our project to die and put some effort into it. When our
>>> three Wikis get overhauled this should be a consideration.
>>>
>>
>> Can we restrict the account creation as described in
>> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**Manual:Preventing_access#**
>> Restrict_account_creation<http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Preventing_access#Restrict_account_creation>
>>
>> You need no account to read the Wiki, so its purpose giving support is not
>> restricted.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Regina
>>
>>
> Hummm... That could prevent new contributors to join the project, but have
> no interest in joining something more, let's say, "official". For example:
> people who write tutorials, tips and tricks, people who make individual
> efforts locally and so on.
>
> There are other ways to block bots and fake users.
>
> Best regards.
>
Thanks for reminding us the spam problem. Luckily, the spam bots
seems to only register new users currently, but not destroying the
content. I shall see if finer CAPTCHA can be implemented to the MediaWiki.
I do not favor closing its new account registration. If we want to
keep it, we need new users to update it.
Please also remember that there is no multilingual site design on
the current cwiki. If we want to replace the current MediaWiki with
CWiki, multilingual site design must be enabled on CWiki.
--
Best regards,
imacat ^_*' <im...@mail.imacat.idv.tw>
PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc
<<Woman's Voice>> News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/
Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/
Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/
Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/
EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Paulo de Souza Lima <pa...@varekai.org>.
2012/6/6 Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>
> Hi all,
>
> Herbert Duerr schrieb:
>
>> On 06.06.2012 05:57, imacat wrote:
>>
>>> It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one.
>>> But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just
>>> moving.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of
>> attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. Please see e.g.
>> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/w/index.php?**
>> title=Special:RecentChanges&**limit=500<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=500>
>>
>> which shows that most of the changelog entries are caused by these
>> Annoybots subscribing about 50 dummy users every day.
>>
>> I'm not sure if this is critical because it could blow up the service
>> but browsing the recent changes list feels like analyzing the contents
>> of a garbage bin instead of a "hey these are interesting updates"
>> moment. Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more
>> resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting
>> plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that
>> really want our project to die and put some effort into it. When our
>> three Wikis get overhauled this should be a consideration.
>>
>
> Can we restrict the account creation as described in
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**Manual:Preventing_access#**
> Restrict_account_creation<http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Preventing_access#Restrict_account_creation>
>
> You need no account to read the Wiki, so its purpose giving support is not
> restricted.
>
> Kind regards
> Regina
>
>
Hummm... That could prevent new contributors to join the project, but have
no interest in joining something more, let's say, "official". For example:
people who write tutorials, tips and tricks, people who make individual
efforts locally and so on.
There are other ways to block bots and fake users.
Best regards.
--
Paulo de Souza Lima
http://almalivre.wordpress.com
Curitiba - PR
Linux User #432358
Ubuntu User #28729
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>.
Hi all,
Herbert Duerr schrieb:
> On 06.06.2012 05:57, imacat wrote:
>> It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one.
>> But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just
>> moving.
>
> Agreed.
>
> Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of
> attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. Please see e.g.
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=500
>
> which shows that most of the changelog entries are caused by these
> Annoybots subscribing about 50 dummy users every day.
>
> I'm not sure if this is critical because it could blow up the service
> but browsing the recent changes list feels like analyzing the contents
> of a garbage bin instead of a "hey these are interesting updates"
> moment. Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more
> resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting
> plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that
> really want our project to die and put some effort into it. When our
> three Wikis get overhauled this should be a consideration.
Can we restrict the account creation as described in
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Preventing_access#Restrict_account_creation
You need no account to read the Wiki, so its purpose giving support is
not restricted.
Kind regards
Regina
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>.
On 06.06.2012 05:57, imacat wrote:
> It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one.
> But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just
> moving.
Agreed.
Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of
attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. Please see e.g.
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=500
which shows that most of the changelog entries are caused by these
Annoybots subscribing about 50 dummy users every day.
I'm not sure if this is critical because it could blow up the service
but browsing the recent changes list feels like analyzing the contents
of a garbage bin instead of a "hey these are interesting updates"
moment. Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more
resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting
plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that
really want our project to die and put some effort into it. When our
three Wikis get overhauled this should be a consideration.
Herbert
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by imacat <im...@mail.imacat.idv.tw>.
I have no opinion whether to join the two Wikis, or discard the
current MediaWiki. Actually, the current content on MediaWiki is quite
outdated and misleading. We may need significant amount of effort to
keep the MediaWiki dated. If we want to keep MediaWiki, we may need to
discard a large amount of the content and start from beginning.
However, I would like to remind you that, some nice people here are
already starting this work. If we want to discard MediaWiki, we may
need to consider how to move the whole Wiki community, not just the Wiki
content.
It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one.
But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just
moving.
On 2012/06/06 09:45, Kevin Grignon said:
> KG01 - see comments inline.
>
> On Jun 6, 2012, at 3:13 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
>>> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
>>> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
>>> been moved to
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a
>>> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
>>> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
>>> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
>>> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
>>> them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
>>> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
>>> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
>>
>> We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home
>>
>> Here is the history:
>>
>> The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project
>>
>> When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created.
>> Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to
>> Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it.
>>
>> The two new wikis were:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home This
>> was the "community wiki" where anyone could create an account and edit
>> content.
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This
>> wiki was restricted to committers.
>>
>> The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a
>> product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put
>> on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do
>> much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something
>> from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was
>> only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under
>> ALv2.
>>
>> If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the
>> license issue. And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that
>> there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki
>> today.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> KG01 - While I appreciate that wiki-oriented design and development resources are scarce, we should consider forming a swat team to sort this out. As a distributed team we need usable tools and useful info. To help orient readers, and make active versus archival material distinct, we should consider a rapid visual refresh, or some other predominant visual affordable. The current "document: outdated" is not predominant enough.
>
>
>>
>>> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
>>> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to
>>> include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
>>> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
>>> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
>>> comment...thanks.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
--
Best regards,
imacat ^_*' <im...@mail.imacat.idv.tw>
PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc
<<Woman's Voice>> News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/
Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/
Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/
Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/
EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
KG01 - see comments inline.
On Jun 6, 2012, at 3:13 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
>> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
>> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
>> been moved to
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a
>> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
>> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
>> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
>> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
>> them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
>> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
>> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
>
> We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home
>
> Here is the history:
>
> The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project
>
> When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created.
> Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to
> Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it.
>
> The two new wikis were:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home This
> was the "community wiki" where anyone could create an account and edit
> content.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This
> wiki was restricted to committers.
>
> The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a
> product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put
> on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do
> much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something
> from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was
> only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under
> ALv2.
>
> If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the
> license issue. And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that
> there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki
> today.
>
> -Rob
>
KG01 - While I appreciate that wiki-oriented design and development resources are scarce, we should consider forming a swat team to sort this out. As a distributed team we need usable tools and useful info. To help orient readers, and make active versus archival material distinct, we should consider a rapid visual refresh, or some other predominant visual affordable. The current "document: outdated" is not predominant enough.
>
>> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
>> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to
>> include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
>> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
>> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
>> comment...thanks.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
> been moved to
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a
> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
> them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home
Here is the history:
The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project
When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created.
Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to
Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it.
The two new wikis were:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home This
was the "community wiki" where anyone could create an account and edit
content.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This
wiki was restricted to committers.
The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a
product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put
on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do
much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something
from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was
only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under
ALv2.
If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the
license issue. And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that
there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki
today.
-Rob
> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to
> include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
> comment...thanks.
>
> --
>
> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Albino B Neto <bi...@gmail.com>.
Hi.
2012/6/5 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>:
> If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki
>
> Juergen
+1
Albino
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Paulo de Souza Lima <pa...@varekai.org>.
2012/6/5 Graham Lauder <yo...@apache.org>
> >
> > it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues
> > with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying
> > wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing
> > is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places
> > all over the wiki.
> >
> > If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki
> >
> > Juergen
>
> +1 for going with Mediawiki simply because of it's feature set.
>
> Cheers
> G
>
> +1 for Mediawiki.
--
Paulo de Souza Lima
http://almalivre.wordpress.com
Curitiba - PR
Linux User #432358
Ubuntu User #28729
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Graham Lauder <yo...@apache.org>.
> On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote:
> > KG01 - See comments inline.
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
> >> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated
> >> plenty of valuable information,including planning,function
> >> specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and
> >> project tracking parts have been moved to
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that
> >> means a
> >> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
> >> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
> >> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
> >> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
> >> them...
> >
> > KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is
> > painful and inefficient.
>
> it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues
> with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying
> wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing
> is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places
> all over the wiki.
>
> If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki
>
> Juergen
+1 for going with Mediawiki simply because of it's feature set.
Cheers
G
>
> > So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
> >
> >> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function
> >> specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for
> >> example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to
> >> the new wiki, or *extend the scope of
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo
> >> include these areas.
> >
> > KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on "development" in the
> > open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I
> > personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering
> > sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an
> > interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki
> > strategy should address the needs of all project stakeholders and
> > contributors.
> >
> >> *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
> >> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
> >> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and
> >> contributors..Please comment...thanks.
> >
> > KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the
> > new wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be
> > important, however, any older content could be left as is in the
> > archives. To help differentiate old versus new, we might consider a
> > different tool. As a better user experience is important, this seems
> > like a good time to move to a newer wiki tool.
> >
> >> --
> >>
> >> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM, TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>> <dennis.hamilton@acm.org <ma...@acm.org>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 on MediaWiki
>>>
>>> The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the
>>> migration and it was concluded that would not be done. �Kay Schenk
>>> might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and
>>> experience since.
>>>
>>> �- Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion.
>>>
>>> I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a
>>> lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth.
>>>
>>> I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless
>>> of what it is.
>>>
>>> Mostly I use the "Project Planning" area.
>>>
>>> So,
>>>
>>> +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to
>>> go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc.
>>> gets moved
>>>
>>
>> I would like to add one more thought/request on this topic.
>>
>> I've actually used Confluence -- the cwiki environment -- more over the
>> course of my wiki work than MediaWiki, but there are pros and cons to
>> each.
>>
>> What I REALLY like about our current cwiki setup, is the apparently
>> automatic navigation generation feature. So, when you add a page under a
>> category, you can quickly see what other pages are there for that area.
>> This makes putting ideas "out there" very quick and efficient.
>>
>> I don't know MW provides in this this regard. But features like this
>> make using cwki for planning pretty easy since there's no futzing with
>> filing into categories etc. SO, if there is a way to do this same kind
>> of thin in MW, we should definitely enable such a feature.
>>
>> Hi, Kay,
>
> IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a
> parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than
> categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less
> convenient, but gives you more control.
Well that's what the popular opinion here seems to be.
> You /can/ create child pages, using the "slash" (/) notation; see my user
> page [1] for several examples. On the child page, you get breadcrumbs at
> the top.
>
OK, I'll look at this
>
> While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well;
I can't speak to that. I sued it in my former employment. But, it was not
the "public facing" entity. I know MW is really that among other things.
it's good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer,
> it gets harder to find.
>
OK, thanks for this information. I actually did try to find some
information about the navigator path business in the MW docs, but nothing
jumped out at me.
I fully realize that maintaining these two entities for our use is NOT
optimal. Not at all. I'm fine with exclusive use of MW thought I will miss
some of the cwiki features.
>
> [1] <http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**TJFrazier<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier>
> >
>
> /tj/
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Everything will be all right in the end...
if it's not all right then it's not the end. "
-- Sonny, "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel"
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 6/10/12 10:36 PM, Paulo de Souza Lima wrote:
> 2012/6/10 TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com>
>
>> On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>
>> Hi, Kay,
>>
>>
>> IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a
>> parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than
>> categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less
>> convenient, but gives you more control. You /can/ create child pages, using
>> the "slash" (/) notation; see my user page [1] for several examples. On the
>> child page, you get breadcrumbs at the top.
>>
>> While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; it's
>> good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, it
>> gets harder to find.
>>
>> [1] <http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**TJFrazier<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier>
>>>
>>
>> /tj/
>>
>>
> Hi. My 2 cents:
>
> If you want to take advantage of Mediawiki's semantic capabilities, there's
> no need to create child pages. There are a lot of cool stuff that can be
> used to perform the tasks required in this thread.
the hierarchical structure has some advantages to organize articles that
are related to the same topic. For example the Developer's Guide is
organized this way and it allows to easy run wiki bots on the DevGuide only.
The {{DISPLAYTITLE:<your short title>}} template can be used to reduce
the visible title.
But using the right categories allows further useful tooling and
filtering of articles.
Juergen
>
> Cheers
>
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Paulo de Souza Lima <pa...@varekai.org>.
2012/6/10 TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com>
> On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>>
>>
> Hi, Kay,
>
>
> IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a
> parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than
> categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less
> convenient, but gives you more control. You /can/ create child pages, using
> the "slash" (/) notation; see my user page [1] for several examples. On the
> child page, you get breadcrumbs at the top.
>
> While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; it's
> good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, it
> gets harder to find.
>
> [1] <http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**TJFrazier<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier>
> >
>
> /tj/
>
>
Hi. My 2 cents:
If you want to take advantage of Mediawiki's semantic capabilities, there's
no need to create child pages. There are a lot of cool stuff that can be
used to perform the tasks required in this thread.
Cheers
--
Paulo de Souza Lima
http://almalivre.wordpress.com
Curitiba - PR
Linux User #432358
Ubuntu User #28729
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com>.
On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>
> On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> <dennis.hamilton@acm.org <ma...@acm.org>> wrote:
>>
>> +1 on MediaWiki
>>
>> The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the
>> migration and it was concluded that would not be done. �Kay Schenk
>> might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and
>> experience since.
>>
>> �- Dennis
>>
>>
>> Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion.
>>
>> I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a
>> lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth.
>>
>> I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless
>> of what it is.
>>
>> Mostly I use the "Project Planning" area.
>>
>> So,
>>
>> +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to
>> go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc.
>> gets moved
>
> I would like to add one more thought/request on this topic.
>
> I've actually used Confluence -- the cwiki environment -- more over the
> course of my wiki work than MediaWiki, but there are pros and cons to each.
>
> What I REALLY like about our current cwiki setup, is the apparently
> automatic navigation generation feature. So, when you add a page under a
> category, you can quickly see what other pages are there for that area.
> This makes putting ideas "out there" very quick and efficient.
>
> I don't know MW provides in this this regard. But features like this
> make using cwki for planning pretty easy since there's no futzing with
> filing into categories etc. SO, if there is a way to do this same kind
> of thin in MW, we should definitely enable such a feature.
>
Hi, Kay,
IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has
a parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than
categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less
convenient, but gives you more control. You /can/ create child pages,
using the "slash" (/) notation; see my user page [1] for several
examples. On the child page, you get breadcrumbs at the top.
While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; it's
good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, it
gets harder to find.
[1] <http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier>
/tj/
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <dennis.hamilton@acm.org <ma...@acm.org>> wrote:
>
> +1 on MediaWiki
>
> The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the
> migration and it was concluded that would not be done. �Kay Schenk
> might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and
> experience since.
>
> �- Dennis
>
>
> Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion.
>
> I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a
> lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth.
>
> I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless
> of what it is.
>
> Mostly I use the "Project Planning" area.
>
> So,
>
> +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to
> go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc.
> gets moved
I would like to add one more thought/request on this topic.
I've actually used Confluence -- the cwiki environment -- more over the
course of my wiki work than MediaWiki, but there are pros and cons to each.
What I REALLY like about our current cwiki setup, is the apparently
automatic navigation generation feature. So, when you add a page under a
category, you can quickly see what other pages are there for that area.
This makes putting ideas "out there" very quick and efficient.
I don't know MW provides in this this regard. But features like this
make using cwki for planning pretty easy since there's no futzing with
filing into categories etc. SO, if there is a way to do this same kind
of thin in MW, we should definitely enable such a feature.
> �
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: J�rgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischmidt@googlemail.com
> <ma...@googlemail.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 00:37
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org <ma...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
>
> On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote:
> > KG01 - See comments inline.
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh <chengjh@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
> >> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page �has
> accumulated plenty
> >> of valuable information,including planning,function
> specification,technical
> >> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking
> parts have
> >> been moved to
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that
> means
> >> a
> >> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different
> wiki
> >> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing
> styles
> >> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it
> is not
> >> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
> >> them...
> >
> >
> > KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is
> > painful and inefficient.
>
> it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues
> with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying
> wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing
> is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places
> all over the wiki.
>
> If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki
>
> Juergen
>
> >
> > So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
> >> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function
> specification
> >> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we
> can move the
> >> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or
> *extend the
> >> scope of
> �https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo
> >> include these areas.
> >
> >
> > KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on "development"
> in the
> > open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I
> > personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering
> > sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an
> > interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki
> strategy
> > should address the needs of all project stakeholders and
> contributors.
> >
> >
> >> *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
> >> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and
> continue to
> >> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and
> contributors..Please
> >> comment...thanks.
> >>
> >>
> > KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references
> from the new
> > wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be
> important,
> > however, any older content could be left as is in the archives.
> To help
> > differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool.
> As a
> > better user experience is important, this seems like a good time
> to move to
> > a newer wiki tool.
> >
> >
> >> --
> >>
> >> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Everything will be all right in the end...
> ����� if it's not all right then it's not the end. "
> ����� � � �� -- Sonny, "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel"
>
>
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Everything will be all right in the end...
if it's not all right then it's not the end. "
-- Sonny, "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel"
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> wrote:
> +1 on MediaWiki
>
> The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the
> migration and it was concluded that would not be done. Kay Schenk might
> have much to add on that, based on her interest then and experience since.
>
> - Dennis
>
Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion.
I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a lot.
I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth.
I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless of
what it is.
Mostly I use the "Project Planning" area.
So,
+1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to go
with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc.
gets moved
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischmidt@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 00:37
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
>
> On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote:
> > KG01 - See comments inline.
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
> >> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated
> plenty
> >> of valuable information,including planning,function
> specification,technical
> >> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts
> have
> >> been moved to
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,thatmeans
> >> a
> >> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
> >> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
> >> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
> >> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
> >> them...
> >
> >
> > KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is
> > painful and inefficient.
>
> it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues
> with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying
> wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing
> is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places
> all over the wiki.
>
> If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki
>
> Juergen
>
> >
> > So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
> >> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function
> specification
> >> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move
> the
> >> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend
> the
> >> scope of
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo
> >> include these areas.
> >
> >
> > KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on "development" in the
> > open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I
> > personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering
> > sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an
> > interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki
> strategy
> > should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors.
> >
> >
> >> *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
> >> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
> >> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and
> contributors..Please
> >> comment...thanks.
> >>
> >>
> > KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the
> new
> > wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be
> important,
> > however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help
> > differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a
> > better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move
> to
> > a newer wiki tool.
> >
> >
> >> --
> >>
> >> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
> >>
> >
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Everything will be all right in the end...
if it's not all right then it's not the end. "
-- Sonny, "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel"
RE: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
+1 on MediaWiki
The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the migration and it was concluded that would not be done. Kay Schenk might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and experience since.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischmidt@googlemail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 00:37
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote:
> KG01 - See comments inline.
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
>> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
>> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
>> been moved to
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means
>> a
>> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
>> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
>> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
>> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
>> them...
>
>
> KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is
> painful and inefficient.
it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues
with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying
wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing
is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places
all over the wiki.
If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki
Juergen
>
> So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
>> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
>> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
>> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
>> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo
>> include these areas.
>
>
> KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on "development" in the
> open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I
> personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering
> sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an
> interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy
> should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors.
>
>
>> *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
>> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
>> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
>> comment...thanks.
>>
>>
> KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new
> wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important,
> however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help
> differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a
> better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to
> a newer wiki tool.
>
>
>> --
>>
>> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
>>
>
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote:
> KG01 - See comments inline.
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
>> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
>> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
>> been moved to
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means
>> a
>> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
>> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
>> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
>> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
>> them...
>
>
> KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is
> painful and inefficient.
it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues
with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying
wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing
is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places
all over the wiki.
If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki
Juergen
>
> So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
>> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
>> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
>> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
>> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo
>> include these areas.
>
>
> KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on "development" in the
> open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I
> personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering
> sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an
> interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy
> should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors.
>
>
>> *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
>> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
>> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
>> comment...thanks.
>>
>>
> KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new
> wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important,
> however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help
> differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a
> better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to
> a newer wiki tool.
>
>
>> --
>>
>> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
>>
>
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Kevin Grignon <ke...@gmail.com>.
KG01 - See comments inline.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
> been moved to
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means
> a
> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
> them...
KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is
painful and inefficient.
So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo
> include these areas.
KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on "development" in the
open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I
personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering
sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an
interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy
should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors.
> *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
> comment...thanks.
>
>
KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new
wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important,
however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help
differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a
better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to
a newer wiki tool.
> --
>
> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
>
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Posted by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>.
Hi all,
chengjh schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty
> of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical
> documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have
> been moved to
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a
> new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki
> software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles
> between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not
> convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between
> them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record
> technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification
> and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the
> scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the
> scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to
> include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a
> link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to
> accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please
> comment...thanks.
>
I see such new content already in the MediaWiki. In the beginning I
thought cwiki would be the right place for project content. But in
reality people use the MediaWiki. For example the new start of UX, use
of SVN, explanation to DrawingLayer changes, where written in the MediaWiki.
MediaWiki use is common and many people know to use. You can easily get
help on using it and converter exists, in contrast to Cwiki. MediaWiki
has a lot of features which make it attractive to readers and editors as
well.
Do you know, that the MediaWiki has about 11000 pages? The problem is
not that some of them are outdated. The problem of outdated content
would arise with a new, active used wiki very quickly too. The problem
is to have members, which feel responsible for an area.
There are parts in the MediaWiki which you cannot simple discontinue,
for example the Developer's Guide (linked from the SDK) and the Calc
functions reference (linked from the help).
For that reasons, I favor to use the MediaWiki as the only Wiki and drop
the use of CWiki.
Kind regards
Regina