You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch> on 2011/06/14 04:06:27 UTC
Wiki for the project
Hi at all
On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations,
or we get a seperate wiki for OOo?
If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It
is ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
Greetings Raphael
--
My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
RE: Wiki for the project
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
+1
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Rist [mailto:andrew.rist@oracle.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 10:17
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
I think this should be split into two phases. The first phase is
getting our infrastructure for the new project going.
This will allow us to coordinate our current activities. Then we plan
and implement the migration of OOo content.(using the wiki)
I think there will be a combination of archiving and migrating. That is
something we can use the new wiki to discuss and plan.
Andrew
On 6/14/2011 5:54 AM, Frank Peters wrote:
> What will happen to the existing wiki at
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
> which has quite some content (including
> the main documentation pieces)?
>
> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
> migrate existing content?
>
> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
> have admin rights on the wiki).
>
> Frank
>
>> +1 on the wiki request.
>>
>> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
>> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the
>> IPMC? Or do
>> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some
>> Infrastructure issue
>> tracking system?
>>
>> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if
>> someone can
>> point me in the right direction.
>>
>> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for
>> routine
>> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do
>> projects
>> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi at all
>>>
>>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect
>>> informations, or we
>>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>>
>>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo
>>> pages. It is
>>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>>
>>> Greetings Raphael
>>> --
>>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>>
>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
> I think this should be split into two phases. The first phase is getting our infrastructure for the new project going.
> This will allow us to coordinate our current activities. Then we plan and implement the migration of OOo content.(using the wiki)
> I think there will be a combination of archiving and migrating. That is something we can use the new wiki to discuss and plan.
I agree. There is a but. Before we start we need to choose which wiki to use. There are some ASF guidelines:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html#create-website-using-wiki
https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/
Confluence vs. moinmoin are the available choices.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Andrew
>
>
> On 6/14/2011 5:54 AM, Frank Peters wrote:
>> What will happen to the existing wiki at
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
>> which has quite some content (including
>> the main documentation pieces)?
>>
>> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
>> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
>> migrate existing content?
>>
>> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
>> have admin rights on the wiki).
>>
>> Frank
>>
>>> +1 on the wiki request.
>>>
>>> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
>>> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or do
>>> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure issue
>>> tracking system?
>>>
>>> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone can
>>> point me in the right direction.
>>>
>>> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for routine
>>> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do projects
>>> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi at all
>>>>
>>>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>>>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations, or we
>>>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>>>
>>>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It is
>>>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>>>
>>>> Greetings Raphael
>>>> --
>>>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
I think this should be split into two phases. The first phase is
getting our infrastructure for the new project going.
This will allow us to coordinate our current activities. Then we plan
and implement the migration of OOo content.(using the wiki)
I think there will be a combination of archiving and migrating. That is
something we can use the new wiki to discuss and plan.
Andrew
On 6/14/2011 5:54 AM, Frank Peters wrote:
> What will happen to the existing wiki at
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
> which has quite some content (including
> the main documentation pieces)?
>
> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
> migrate existing content?
>
> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
> have admin rights on the wiki).
>
> Frank
>
>> +1 on the wiki request.
>>
>> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
>> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the
>> IPMC? Or do
>> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some
>> Infrastructure issue
>> tracking system?
>>
>> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if
>> someone can
>> point me in the right direction.
>>
>> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for
>> routine
>> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do
>> projects
>> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi at all
>>>
>>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect
>>> informations, or we
>>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>>
>>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo
>>> pages. It is
>>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>>
>>> Greetings Raphael
>>> --
>>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>>
>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
As Sam has said elsewhere, Infrastructure has often been left holding
the bad with custom software installations. They tend to not be very
supportive of the suggestion, especially where other options are
present. It isn't that they will absolutely refuse, but you better
give them a believable support plan.
You could ask for a zone or a jail or whatever, for the project. The
project can then install and maintain phpWiki on its own.
Migration to MoinMoin or Confluence is probably easiest since it is a
one-time hit (ie. no additional maintenance).
Cheers,
-g
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:07, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, this one is huge. So far we have no PHP wiki at Apache.
>
> I guess we can do two things.
>
> 1) you could ask at infra@apache.org if there are options to install a php wiki
> 2) or you check if it is possible to migrate the content to one of the
> supported ASF wiki installations.#
>
> Here is the list of currently used software:
> http://apache.org/dev/services.html
>
> If you would come up with an idea, I think all will be grateful.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Frank Peters
> <fr...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> What will happen to the existing wiki at
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
>> which has quite some content (including
>> the main documentation pieces)?
>>
>> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
>> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
>> migrate existing content?
>>
>> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
>> have admin rights on the wiki).
>>
>> Frank
>>
>>> +1 on the wiki request.
>>>
>>> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
>>> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or
>>> do
>>> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure
>>> issue
>>> tracking system?
>>>
>>> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone can
>>> point me in the right direction.
>>>
>>> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for
>>> routine
>>> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do
>>> projects
>>> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi at all
>>>>
>>>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>>>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations, or
>>>> we
>>>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>>>
>>>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It
>>>> is
>>>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>>>
>>>> Greetings Raphael
>>>> --
>>>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.grobmeier.de
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
Oh, this one is huge. So far we have no PHP wiki at Apache.
I guess we can do two things.
1) you could ask at infra@apache.org if there are options to install a php wiki
2) or you check if it is possible to migrate the content to one of the
supported ASF wiki installations.#
Here is the list of currently used software:
http://apache.org/dev/services.html
If you would come up with an idea, I think all will be grateful.
Cheers
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Frank Peters
<fr...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> What will happen to the existing wiki at
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
> which has quite some content (including
> the main documentation pieces)?
>
> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
> migrate existing content?
>
> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
> have admin rights on the wiki).
>
> Frank
>
>> +1 on the wiki request.
>>
>> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
>> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or
>> do
>> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure
>> issue
>> tracking system?
>>
>> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone can
>> point me in the right direction.
>>
>> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for
>> routine
>> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do
>> projects
>> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi at all
>>>
>>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations, or
>>> we
>>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>>
>>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It
>>> is
>>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>>
>>> Greetings Raphael
>>> --
>>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>>
>>
>
>
--
http://www.grobmeier.de
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
There is a confluence install available at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/
Also keep in mind we recently created a markdown-based custom CMS for projects
to
use for creating and maintaining websites. Markdown is basically a standardized
wiki syntax and integrates well with django templates. If I were writing docs
for ooo that I wanted to either distribute to end-users or otherwise mark as
official project docs, I'd go with the CMS personally. But hey I'm biased.
CMS docs are available at http://www.apache.org/dev/cms.html and
http://www.apache.org/dev/cmsref.html
----- Original Message ----
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton <de...@acm.org>
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, June 14, 2011 1:28:11 PM
> Subject: RE: Wiki for the project
>
> Um, so where would that and other thoughts be on-topic? I have many thoughts
>about on-/off-line help bridging too. Is this the ooo-issues list. (I really
>must catch up on my reading of the groundrules here.)
>
> I take it that the on-line help is under Oracle copyright and can be/has been
>licensed by Oracle then?
>
> What do you mean by one wiki for both the project and the product? I am
>always concerned that non-developing users, even power users have collaborative
>resources that work in the context of their needs and interests.
>
> - Dennis
>
> PS [Wishing we didn't use MoinMoin for a public-participative wiki and
>especially for documentation, but maybe there is other Apache tooling that
>saves us from MoinMoin awkwardness.]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Peters [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 10:15
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
>
> [ ... ]
>
> Why don't we start an Apache wiki with podling activities and
> work on preparing the migration of data from the current
> wiki. It would also be a good opportunity to do some
> housekeeping there. We would finally end up with one
> wiki for both the project and the product.
>
> [ ... ]
>
> Online help originally is LGPL since it is part of the
> source tree. I have been involved in both the help XML format
> and the help authoring framework that was mentioned in another
> thread, so I'd be happy to help out here as well.
>
> One thing we need to consider is the cost of localization
> of the application help (around 400k words), so we should
> carefully balance cost for the project vs benefit to the user.
>
> My favorite way to go would be having core help with the bits
> and "extended" help online, but that is off-topic here.
>
> Frank
>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
On 14/06/2011 23:08, Rob Weir wrote:
> Note the requirements here under "Using a wiki to Create Documentation". It
> looks like we need to restrict write access to that wiki to those who have
> returned iCLA's to Apache.
This is correct if you intend for the wiki content to be made available
via your project website or distributed as part of a release. I don't
think this is necessary if you have a wiki in the cwiki.apache.org or
wiki.apache.org and have no intention of exporting this content (other
mentors will correct me if I'm wrong).
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html
>
> I wonder if this becomes easier if we segregate the documentation onto its
> own wiki?
We have an SVN backed CMS system which is ideal for building project
websites. As Joe said elsewhere this is a home-grown, markdown based
system. It has the advantage of providing both a web based and SVN based
editing environment (although to be honest the web based interface is
usable but clunky - don't tell Joe though he wrote it for us -
volunteers welcome)
For documentation that you intend to distribute this is probably the
best system as you don't have to maintain separate access rights and
people can work offline with the sources. It also means that your
documentation writers are treated as first class citizens on ASF
infrastructure.
The downside is that your documentation writers will need to be able to
use SVN and some simple python scripts to work efficiently (the web
interface is fine for quick edits).
The CMS doesn't seem to be mentioned on the page you link to above. For
more info see http://www.apache.org/dev/cmsref.html
Ross
>
> -Rob
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we
>>>> should definitely have two wikis.
>>>>
>>>> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding
>>>> confluence.
>>>>
>>>> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>>>>
>>>> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>>>>
>>>> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether
>>>> confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with
>>>> various approaches.
>>>
>>> I don't understand, you just said you would start to create a
>>> Confluence ooo-user space to debate whether to use a different
>>> engine?
>>>
>>> There is probably overlap between (1) and (2) so it needs to
>>> be clearly defined what goes where. With (1) you are probably
>>> referring to core development (coding OOo), but there is also
>>> extension development (using UNO to develop extra functionality)
>>> or office automation that probably are better placed in (2) (for
>>> the developer-user).
>>
>> For (1) you understand me correctly. This is the space we need now to start
>> doing all the planning and development blueprints.
>>
>> For (2) I mean a possible way to handle the package user and/or developer
>> user documentation that will be migrated from the wiki at openoffice.org.
>>
>> BTW - It should not be hard to move content between two confluence spaces
>> if it is put in the wrong location.
>>
>>>
>>> If we plan to reuse existing wiki content for docs, it would be
>>> easiest to continue to use MediaWiki (if this is an option)
>>> since this is where all content currently is. A lot of the
>>> content in the docs section uses MW features like
>>> subpages, auto page lists, templates/transclusions etc that
>>> may be cumbersome to migrate.
>>
>> To use MediaWiki someone will need to contribute at infrastructure-dev.
>> Otherwise it is moinmoin or confluence. I don't care so much, but confluence
>> is well supported here at Apache so it is an easy choice.
>>
>> For (3) the options are greater and we can change.
>>
>> I know we need (1) and it is not much harder to do (2) and (3)
>> prospectively and let the rest of the PPMC decide.
>>
>> Here is the jira issue: (INFRA-3684) Create 3 CWiki Spaces for OpenOffice
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>>
>>> Frank
>>
>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jun 14, 2011, at 3:35 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Jun 14, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> Note the requirements here under "Using a wiki to Create Documentation". It
>> looks like we need to restrict write access to that wiki to those who have
>> returned iCLA's to Apache.
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html
>>
>> I wonder if this becomes easier if we segregate the documentation onto its
>> own wiki?
>
> Yes. See https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CWIKI/Index#Index-Butwhatifwewouldlikethecommunityatlargetohelpmaintainthespace%3F
>
> I suggested ooo-dev and ooo-user as different spaces because
>
> (1) The list of who edits and who comments can differ.
>
> (2) It is not known what Wiki our user facing community will really want to use while ooo-dev wants a wiki now.
Now I see this: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CWIKI/Index#Index-Canweusetheautoexportsiteaspartofourmainwebsite%3F
We are being directed towards the CMS - or other SVN based tools of the project website. I wonder...
Regards,
Dave
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we
>>>>> should definitely have two wikis.
>>>>>
>>>>> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding
>>>>> confluence.
>>>>>
>>>>> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether
>>>>> confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with
>>>>> various approaches.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand, you just said you would start to create a
>>>> Confluence ooo-user space to debate whether to use a different
>>>> engine?
>>>>
>>>> There is probably overlap between (1) and (2) so it needs to
>>>> be clearly defined what goes where. With (1) you are probably
>>>> referring to core development (coding OOo), but there is also
>>>> extension development (using UNO to develop extra functionality)
>>>> or office automation that probably are better placed in (2) (for
>>>> the developer-user).
>>>
>>> For (1) you understand me correctly. This is the space we need now to start
>>> doing all the planning and development blueprints.
>>>
>>> For (2) I mean a possible way to handle the package user and/or developer
>>> user documentation that will be migrated from the wiki at openoffice.org.
>>>
>>> BTW - It should not be hard to move content between two confluence spaces
>>> if it is put in the wrong location.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If we plan to reuse existing wiki content for docs, it would be
>>>> easiest to continue to use MediaWiki (if this is an option)
>>>> since this is where all content currently is. A lot of the
>>>> content in the docs section uses MW features like
>>>> subpages, auto page lists, templates/transclusions etc that
>>>> may be cumbersome to migrate.
>>>
>>> To use MediaWiki someone will need to contribute at infrastructure-dev.
>>> Otherwise it is moinmoin or confluence. I don't care so much, but confluence
>>> is well supported here at Apache so it is an easy choice.
>>>
>>> For (3) the options are greater and we can change.
>>>
>>> I know we need (1) and it is not much harder to do (2) and (3)
>>> prospectively and let the rest of the PPMC decide.
>>>
>>> Here is the jira issue: (INFRA-3684) Create 3 CWiki Spaces for OpenOffice
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jun 14, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> Note the requirements here under "Using a wiki to Create Documentation". It
> looks like we need to restrict write access to that wiki to those who have
> returned iCLA's to Apache.
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html
>
> I wonder if this becomes easier if we segregate the documentation onto its
> own wiki?
Yes. See https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CWIKI/Index#Index-Butwhatifwewouldlikethecommunityatlargetohelpmaintainthespace%3F
I suggested ooo-dev and ooo-user as different spaces because
(1) The list of who edits and who comments can differ.
(2) It is not known what Wiki our user facing community will really want to use while ooo-dev wants a wiki now.
Regards,
Dave
>
> -Rob
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we
>>>> should definitely have two wikis.
>>>>
>>>> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding
>>>> confluence.
>>>>
>>>> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>>>>
>>>> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>>>>
>>>> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether
>>>> confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with
>>>> various approaches.
>>>
>>> I don't understand, you just said you would start to create a
>>> Confluence ooo-user space to debate whether to use a different
>>> engine?
>>>
>>> There is probably overlap between (1) and (2) so it needs to
>>> be clearly defined what goes where. With (1) you are probably
>>> referring to core development (coding OOo), but there is also
>>> extension development (using UNO to develop extra functionality)
>>> or office automation that probably are better placed in (2) (for
>>> the developer-user).
>>
>> For (1) you understand me correctly. This is the space we need now to start
>> doing all the planning and development blueprints.
>>
>> For (2) I mean a possible way to handle the package user and/or developer
>> user documentation that will be migrated from the wiki at openoffice.org.
>>
>> BTW - It should not be hard to move content between two confluence spaces
>> if it is put in the wrong location.
>>
>>>
>>> If we plan to reuse existing wiki content for docs, it would be
>>> easiest to continue to use MediaWiki (if this is an option)
>>> since this is where all content currently is. A lot of the
>>> content in the docs section uses MW features like
>>> subpages, auto page lists, templates/transclusions etc that
>>> may be cumbersome to migrate.
>>
>> To use MediaWiki someone will need to contribute at infrastructure-dev.
>> Otherwise it is moinmoin or confluence. I don't care so much, but confluence
>> is well supported here at Apache so it is an easy choice.
>>
>> For (3) the options are greater and we can change.
>>
>> I know we need (1) and it is not much harder to do (2) and (3)
>> prospectively and let the rest of the PPMC decide.
>>
>> Here is the jira issue: (INFRA-3684) Create 3 CWiki Spaces for OpenOffice
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>>
>>> Frank
>>
>>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
Note the requirements here under "Using a wiki to Create Documentation". It
looks like we need to restrict write access to that wiki to those who have
returned iCLA's to Apache.
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html
I wonder if this becomes easier if we segregate the documentation onto its
own wiki?
-Rob
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we
> >> should definitely have two wikis.
> >>
> >> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding
> >> confluence.
> >>
> >> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
> >>
> >> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
> >>
> >> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether
> >> confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with
> >> various approaches.
> >
> > I don't understand, you just said you would start to create a
> > Confluence ooo-user space to debate whether to use a different
> > engine?
> >
> > There is probably overlap between (1) and (2) so it needs to
> > be clearly defined what goes where. With (1) you are probably
> > referring to core development (coding OOo), but there is also
> > extension development (using UNO to develop extra functionality)
> > or office automation that probably are better placed in (2) (for
> > the developer-user).
>
> For (1) you understand me correctly. This is the space we need now to start
> doing all the planning and development blueprints.
>
> For (2) I mean a possible way to handle the package user and/or developer
> user documentation that will be migrated from the wiki at openoffice.org.
>
> BTW - It should not be hard to move content between two confluence spaces
> if it is put in the wrong location.
>
> >
> > If we plan to reuse existing wiki content for docs, it would be
> > easiest to continue to use MediaWiki (if this is an option)
> > since this is where all content currently is. A lot of the
> > content in the docs section uses MW features like
> > subpages, auto page lists, templates/transclusions etc that
> > may be cumbersome to migrate.
>
> To use MediaWiki someone will need to contribute at infrastructure-dev.
> Otherwise it is moinmoin or confluence. I don't care so much, but confluence
> is well supported here at Apache so it is an easy choice.
>
> For (3) the options are greater and we can change.
>
> I know we need (1) and it is not much harder to do (2) and (3)
> prospectively and let the rest of the PPMC decide.
>
> Here is the jira issue: (INFRA-3684) Create 3 CWiki Spaces for OpenOffice
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > Frank
>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
>> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we
>> should definitely have two wikis.
>>
>> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding
>> confluence.
>>
>> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>>
>> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>>
>> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether
>> confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with
>> various approaches.
>
> I don't understand, you just said you would start to create a
> Confluence ooo-user space to debate whether to use a different
> engine?
>
> There is probably overlap between (1) and (2) so it needs to
> be clearly defined what goes where. With (1) you are probably
> referring to core development (coding OOo), but there is also
> extension development (using UNO to develop extra functionality)
> or office automation that probably are better placed in (2) (for
> the developer-user).
For (1) you understand me correctly. This is the space we need now to start doing all the planning and development blueprints.
For (2) I mean a possible way to handle the package user and/or developer user documentation that will be migrated from the wiki at openoffice.org.
BTW - It should not be hard to move content between two confluence spaces if it is put in the wrong location.
>
> If we plan to reuse existing wiki content for docs, it would be
> easiest to continue to use MediaWiki (if this is an option)
> since this is where all content currently is. A lot of the
> content in the docs section uses MW features like
> subpages, auto page lists, templates/transclusions etc that
> may be cumbersome to migrate.
To use MediaWiki someone will need to contribute at infrastructure-dev. Otherwise it is moinmoin or confluence. I don't care so much, but confluence is well supported here at Apache so it is an easy choice.
For (3) the options are greater and we can change.
I know we need (1) and it is not much harder to do (2) and (3) prospectively and let the rest of the PPMC decide.
Here is the jira issue: (INFRA-3684) Create 3 CWiki Spaces for OpenOffice
Regards,
Dave
>
> Frank
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Frank Peters <fr...@googlemail.com>.
> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we
> should definitely have two wikis.
>
> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding
> confluence.
>
> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>
> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>
> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether
> confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with
> various approaches.
I don't understand, you just said you would start to create a
Confluence ooo-user space to debate whether to use a different
engine?
There is probably overlap between (1) and (2) so it needs to
be clearly defined what goes where. With (1) you are probably
referring to core development (coding OOo), but there is also
extension development (using UNO to develop extra functionality)
or office automation that probably are better placed in (2) (for
the developer-user).
If we plan to reuse existing wiki content for docs, it would be
easiest to continue to use MediaWiki (if this is an option)
since this is where all content currently is. A lot of the
content in the docs section uses MW features like
subpages, auto page lists, templates/transclusions etc that
may be cumbersome to migrate.
Frank
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> (A) ooo-user - the wiki for users that includes the ability for the whole
> OOo community at large to contribute to documentation.
>
>
It is that part that I'm having trouble reconciling with the CLA requirement
stated here for Apache wikis:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html
Or am I misinterpreting this? Does the CLA requirement attach to all
documentation produced on a wiki, or only documentation that is released
with Apache source and binary distributions? In other words, do we require
a CLA for someone who contributes to documentation that is web-only?
(B) ooo - the project site which holds everything together. Does it replace
> the backbone of openoffice.org? I don't know, but we'll need something.
>
> (C) ooo-dev - the project development wiki.
>
> In the end I see (A) and (C) being parts of the website along with the QA/
> bugzilla / JIRA section.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jun 14, 2011, at 2:50 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
> Op 14-6-2011 22:46, Dave Fisher schreef:
>>>> I prefer not to mix developer/project-facing material and user-facing
>>>> material on the same wiki, because it is difficult enough to maintain
>>>> a consistent voice for the user-facing material. Also, users should
>>>> be able to easily subscribe to and make additions to the
>>>> user-oriented wiki without contending with the project-oriented
>>>> organization.
>>>>
>>>> That was my thinking.
>>> I see and I get your point now. I agree we need a certain
>>> degree of separation but that does not necessarily need to
>>> be in the form of two distinct wikis.
>>>
>>> Having two sections in a common wiki would allow to easily
>>> move content over, as occasionally done with OOo where
>>> feature developers kept draft documentation for their
>>> features while in development and then docs folks
>>> clean it up and move the content over to the documentation
>>> section.
>>>
>>> Also, a common entry portal then leading off to user-facing
>>> documentation or developer documentation or project related
>>> pages would reveal the mechanics of the project to those
>>> who are unfamiliar with how open source projects work and
>>> may help make this more transparent.
>> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we should definitely have two wikis.
>>
>> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding confluence.
>>
>> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>>
>> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>>
>> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with various approaches.
>>
>> (3) ooo - for the project website. There are options here as well CMS, moinmoin, Forrest, ...
>
> What would the ooo wiki contain that wouldn't fit in the ooo-dev wiki?
The ooo-dev wiki is the project wiki and could open to more than committers.
The ooo wiki could be the basis for the project website which is more official and is maintained by the committers to the project.
If organized in layers with the user first.
(A) ooo-user - the wiki for users that includes the ability for the whole OOo community at large to contribute to documentation.
(B) ooo - the project site which holds everything together. Does it replace the backbone of openoffice.org? I don't know, but we'll need something.
(C) ooo-dev - the project development wiki.
In the end I see (A) and (C) being parts of the website along with the QA/ bugzilla / JIRA section.
Regards,
Dave
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Simon Brouwer <si...@xs4all.nl>.
Op 14-6-2011 22:46, Dave Fisher schreef:
>>> I prefer not to mix developer/project-facing material and user-facing
>>> material on the same wiki, because it is difficult enough to maintain
>>> a consistent voice for the user-facing material. Also, users should
>>> be able to easily subscribe to and make additions to the
>>> user-oriented wiki without contending with the project-oriented
>>> organization.
>>>
>>> That was my thinking.
>> I see and I get your point now. I agree we need a certain
>> degree of separation but that does not necessarily need to
>> be in the form of two distinct wikis.
>>
>> Having two sections in a common wiki would allow to easily
>> move content over, as occasionally done with OOo where
>> feature developers kept draft documentation for their
>> features while in development and then docs folks
>> clean it up and move the content over to the documentation
>> section.
>>
>> Also, a common entry portal then leading off to user-facing
>> documentation or developer documentation or project related
>> pages would reveal the mechanics of the project to those
>> who are unfamiliar with how open source projects work and
>> may help make this more transparent.
> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we should definitely have two wikis.
>
> See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding confluence.
>
> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>
> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>
> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with various approaches.
>
> (3) ooo - for the project website. There are options here as well CMS, moinmoin, Forrest, ...
What would the ooo wiki contain that wouldn't fit in the ooo-dev wiki?
--
Vriendelijke groet,
Simon Brouwer.
| http://nl.openoffice.org | http://www.opentaal.org |
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
>> I prefer not to mix developer/project-facing material and user-facing
>> material on the same wiki, because it is difficult enough to maintain
>> a consistent voice for the user-facing material. Also, users should
>> be able to easily subscribe to and make additions to the
>> user-oriented wiki without contending with the project-oriented
>> organization.
>>
>> That was my thinking.
>
> I see and I get your point now. I agree we need a certain
> degree of separation but that does not necessarily need to
> be in the form of two distinct wikis.
>
> Having two sections in a common wiki would allow to easily
> move content over, as occasionally done with OOo where
> feature developers kept draft documentation for their
> features while in development and then docs folks
> clean it up and move the content over to the documentation
> section.
>
> Also, a common entry portal then leading off to user-facing
> documentation or developer documentation or project related
> pages would reveal the mechanics of the project to those
> who are unfamiliar with how open source projects work and
> may help make this more transparent.
If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we should definitely have two wikis.
See https://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/ for the instructions regarding confluence.
We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
(1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
(2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with various approaches.
(3) ooo - for the project website. There are options here as well CMS, moinmoin, Forrest, ...
I'll make the request from Infra. I have experience with Confluence and will do the initial setup once Infrastructure creates the space(s). I'll add all committers that are on the project page to the committers group as we go.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Frank
>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Frank Peters
>> [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 14,
>> 2011 10:48 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Wiki for the
>> project
>>
>> Dennis,
>>
>>> Um, so where would that and other thoughts be on-topic? I have
>>> many thoughts about on-/off-line help bridging too. Is this the
>>> ooo-issues list. (I really must catch up on my reading of the
>>> groundrules here.)
>>>
>>> I take it that the on-line help is under Oracle copyright and can
>>> be/has been licensed by Oracle then?
>>
>> Yes. "Online" help (that is, the application help) is a module in the
>> source tree (helpcontent2) and under Oracle Copyright. I guess it was
>> part of the bits donated to Apache?
>>
>>> What do you mean by one wiki for both the project and the product?
>>> I
>>
>> One for contributors (project planning, drafts, developer docs +
>> guidelines) one for consumers (user manuals, online help, training,
>> tutorials).
>>
>>> am always concerned that non-developing users, even power users
>>> have collaborative resources that work in the context of their
>>> needs and interests.
>>
>> I'm sorry but I don't think that I get your point here.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Frank Peters <fr...@googlemail.com>.
> I prefer not to mix developer/project-facing material and user-facing
> material on the same wiki, because it is difficult enough to maintain
> a consistent voice for the user-facing material. Also, users should
> be able to easily subscribe to and make additions to the
> user-oriented wiki without contending with the project-oriented
> organization.
>
> That was my thinking.
I see and I get your point now. I agree we need a certain
degree of separation but that does not necessarily need to
be in the form of two distinct wikis.
Having two sections in a common wiki would allow to easily
move content over, as occasionally done with OOo where
feature developers kept draft documentation for their
features while in development and then docs folks
clean it up and move the content over to the documentation
section.
Also, a common entry portal then leading off to user-facing
documentation or developer documentation or project related
pages would reveal the mechanics of the project to those
who are unfamiliar with how open source projects work and
may help make this more transparent.
Frank
> -----Original Message----- From: Frank Peters
> [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 14,
> 2011 10:48 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Wiki for the
> project
>
> Dennis,
>
>> Um, so where would that and other thoughts be on-topic? I have
>> many thoughts about on-/off-line help bridging too. Is this the
>> ooo-issues list. (I really must catch up on my reading of the
>> groundrules here.)
>>
>> I take it that the on-line help is under Oracle copyright and can
>> be/has been licensed by Oracle then?
>
> Yes. "Online" help (that is, the application help) is a module in the
> source tree (helpcontent2) and under Oracle Copyright. I guess it was
> part of the bits donated to Apache?
>
>> What do you mean by one wiki for both the project and the product?
>> I
>
> One for contributors (project planning, drafts, developer docs +
> guidelines) one for consumers (user manuals, online help, training,
> tutorials).
>
>> am always concerned that non-developing users, even power users
>> have collaborative resources that work in the context of their
>> needs and interests.
>
> I'm sorry but I don't think that I get your point here.
>
> Frank
>
RE: Wiki for the project
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Sorry, clumsy wording on my part.
I prefer not to mix developer/project-facing material and user-facing material on the same wiki, because it is difficult enough to maintain a consistent voice for the user-facing material. Also, users should be able to easily subscribe to and make additions to the user-oriented wiki without contending with the project-oriented organization.
That was my thinking.
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Peters [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 10:48
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
Dennis,
> Um, so where would that and other thoughts be on-topic? I have many
> thoughts about on-/off-line help bridging too. Is this the
> ooo-issues list. (I really must catch up on my reading of the
> groundrules here.)
>
> I take it that the on-line help is under Oracle copyright and can
> be/has been licensed by Oracle then?
Yes. "Online" help (that is, the application help) is a module
in the source tree (helpcontent2) and under Oracle Copyright.
I guess it was part of the bits donated to Apache?
> What do you mean by one wiki for both the project and the product? I
One for contributors (project planning, drafts, developer docs
+ guidelines) one for consumers (user manuals, online help,
training, tutorials).
> am always concerned that non-developing users, even power users have
> collaborative resources that work in the context of their needs and
> interests.
I'm sorry but I don't think that I get your point here.
Frank
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Frank Peters <fr...@googlemail.com>.
Dennis,
> Um, so where would that and other thoughts be on-topic? I have many
> thoughts about on-/off-line help bridging too. Is this the
> ooo-issues list. (I really must catch up on my reading of the
> groundrules here.)
>
> I take it that the on-line help is under Oracle copyright and can
> be/has been licensed by Oracle then?
Yes. "Online" help (that is, the application help) is a module
in the source tree (helpcontent2) and under Oracle Copyright.
I guess it was part of the bits donated to Apache?
> What do you mean by one wiki for both the project and the product? I
One for contributors (project planning, drafts, developer docs
+ guidelines) one for consumers (user manuals, online help,
training, tutorials).
> am always concerned that non-developing users, even power users have
> collaborative resources that work in the context of their needs and
> interests.
I'm sorry but I don't think that I get your point here.
Frank
RE: Wiki for the project
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Um, so where would that and other thoughts be on-topic? I have many thoughts about on-/off-line help bridging too. Is this the ooo-issues list. (I really must catch up on my reading of the groundrules here.)
I take it that the on-line help is under Oracle copyright and can be/has been licensed by Oracle then?
What do you mean by one wiki for both the project and the product? I am always concerned that non-developing users, even power users have collaborative resources that work in the context of their needs and interests.
- Dennis
PS [Wishing we didn't use MoinMoin for a public-participative wiki and especially for documentation, but maybe there is other Apache tooling that saves us from MoinMoin awkwardness.]
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Peters [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 10:15
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
[ ... ]
Why don't we start an Apache wiki with podling activities and
work on preparing the migration of data from the current
wiki. It would also be a good opportunity to do some
housekeeping there. We would finally end up with one
wiki for both the project and the product.
[ ... ]
Online help originally is LGPL since it is part of the
source tree. I have been involved in both the help XML format
and the help authoring framework that was mentioned in another
thread, so I'd be happy to help out here as well.
One thing we need to consider is the cost of localization
of the application help (around 400k words), so we should
carefully balance cost for the project vs benefit to the user.
My favorite way to go would be having core help with the bits
and "extended" help online, but that is off-topic here.
Frank
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Frank Peters <fr...@googlemail.com>.
> It strikes me that there are two different wikis being talked about
> right now.
>
> One is one that we need in the podling for incubation activities.
>
> The other(s) are wikis that are part of the OpenOffice.org
> infrastructure for a variety of purposes and may be public facing in
> different ways.
>
> I'm not sure they should be comingled at this point. After all,
> something we may need quickly in the podling is a wiki where we
> gather around the campfire on what the others are and what to do with
> them, how long will they stay where they are, etc.
The only distinction that would make sense here is a
contributor vs a user wiki, where the latter is used
for documentation for people just interested in using
the software, and the former is used for anything around
the project.
The current OOo wiki instance is covering both and IMO this
is a good thing since it allows you to pull users
to the contributor side more easily and makes project
efforts more transparent to the end-user.
Why don't we start an Apache wiki with podling activities and
work on preparing the migration of data from the current
wiki. It would also be a good opportunity to do some
housekeeping there. We would finally end up with one
wiki for both the project and the product.
> PS: I know that the LibreOffice folk have been rapidly rebranding and
> reissuing user documentation as well, along with on-line and off-line
> help. I am not sure whether it is all Creative Commons Attribution
> (some have that as part of a dual licensing, it appears, others seem
> to be rather murky concerning what the license might be), but I
> suspect we need to give some consideration to whether and how that
> effort is accommodated.
Online help originally is LGPL since it is part of the
source tree. I have been involved in both the help XML format
and the help authoring framework that was mentioned in another
thread, so I'd be happy to help out here as well.
One thing we need to consider is the cost of localization
of the application help (around 400k words), so we should
carefully balance cost for the project vs benefit to the user.
My favorite way to go would be having core help with the bits
and "extended" help online, but that is off-topic here.
Frank
RE: Wiki for the project
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
+1
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:apache@robweir.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 10:35
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> It strikes me that there are two different wikis being talked about right
> now.
>
>
At least.
> One is one that we need in the podling for incubation activities.
>
>
That was what I was thinking. A wiki where we could start laying on the plan
for the next week, month, quarter, listing the tasks that we think need to
be done, in what order, along with who volunteers to do them. With a
project of this size I think we'll quickly be stepping on each other's toes
if we don't have some way to coordinate. It could be done in an issue
tracker as well. But I think a wiki is easiest to get started with.
So my proposal is we continue using the list to discuss, but use a wiki to
record the "plan of record", which is always open to further debate on the
list, as well as revision.
> The other(s) are wikis that are part of the OpenOffice.org infrastructure
> for a variety of purposes and may be public facing in different ways.
>
>
Right. That is something else, very important, but less urgent. But these
are related. We should develop a plan on the podling wiki for how we will
migrate the user-facing OpenOffice.org wiki to Apache infrastructure.
-Rob
I'm not sure they should be comingled at this point. After all, something
> we may need quickly in the podling is a wiki where we gather around the
> campfire on what the others are and what to do with them, how long will they
> stay where they are, etc.
>
> - Dennis
>
> PS: I know that the LibreOffice folk have been rapidly rebranding and
> reissuing user documentation as well, along with on-line and off-line help.
> I am not sure whether it is all Creative Commons Attribution (some have
> that as part of a dual licensing, it appears, others seem to be rather murky
> concerning what the license might be), but I suspect we need to give some
> consideration to whether and how that effort is accommodated.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Peters [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 05:55
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: fpe@openoffice.org
> Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
>
> What will happen to the existing wiki at
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
> which has quite some content (including
> the main documentation pieces)?
>
> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
> migrate existing content?
>
> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
> have admin rights on the wiki).
>
> Frank
>
> > +1 on the wiki request.
> >
> > Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
> > something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or
> do
> > we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure
> issue
> > tracking system?
> >
> > I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone
> can
> > point me in the right direction.
> >
> > Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for
> routine
> > requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do
> projects
> > typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi at all
> >>
> >> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
> >> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations,
> or we
> >> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
> >>
> >> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It
> is
> >> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
> >>
> >> Greetings Raphael
> >> --
> >> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> It strikes me that there are two different wikis being talked about right
> now.
>
>
At least.
> One is one that we need in the podling for incubation activities.
>
>
That was what I was thinking. A wiki where we could start laying on the plan
for the next week, month, quarter, listing the tasks that we think need to
be done, in what order, along with who volunteers to do them. With a
project of this size I think we'll quickly be stepping on each other's toes
if we don't have some way to coordinate. It could be done in an issue
tracker as well. But I think a wiki is easiest to get started with.
So my proposal is we continue using the list to discuss, but use a wiki to
record the "plan of record", which is always open to further debate on the
list, as well as revision.
> The other(s) are wikis that are part of the OpenOffice.org infrastructure
> for a variety of purposes and may be public facing in different ways.
>
>
Right. That is something else, very important, but less urgent. But these
are related. We should develop a plan on the podling wiki for how we will
migrate the user-facing OpenOffice.org wiki to Apache infrastructure.
-Rob
I'm not sure they should be comingled at this point. After all, something
> we may need quickly in the podling is a wiki where we gather around the
> campfire on what the others are and what to do with them, how long will they
> stay where they are, etc.
>
> - Dennis
>
> PS: I know that the LibreOffice folk have been rapidly rebranding and
> reissuing user documentation as well, along with on-line and off-line help.
> I am not sure whether it is all Creative Commons Attribution (some have
> that as part of a dual licensing, it appears, others seem to be rather murky
> concerning what the license might be), but I suspect we need to give some
> consideration to whether and how that effort is accommodated.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Peters [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 05:55
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: fpe@openoffice.org
> Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
>
> What will happen to the existing wiki at
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
> which has quite some content (including
> the main documentation pieces)?
>
> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
> migrate existing content?
>
> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
> have admin rights on the wiki).
>
> Frank
>
> > +1 on the wiki request.
> >
> > Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
> > something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or
> do
> > we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure
> issue
> > tracking system?
> >
> > I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone
> can
> > point me in the right direction.
> >
> > Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for
> routine
> > requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do
> projects
> > typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi at all
> >>
> >> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
> >> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations,
> or we
> >> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
> >>
> >> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It
> is
> >> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
> >>
> >> Greetings Raphael
> >> --
> >> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
> >>
> >
>
>
RE: Wiki for the project
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
It strikes me that there are two different wikis being talked about right now.
One is one that we need in the podling for incubation activities.
The other(s) are wikis that are part of the OpenOffice.org infrastructure for a variety of purposes and may be public facing in different ways.
I'm not sure they should be comingled at this point. After all, something we may need quickly in the podling is a wiki where we gather around the campfire on what the others are and what to do with them, how long will they stay where they are, etc.
- Dennis
PS: I know that the LibreOffice folk have been rapidly rebranding and reissuing user documentation as well, along with on-line and off-line help. I am not sure whether it is all Creative Commons Attribution (some have that as part of a dual licensing, it appears, others seem to be rather murky concerning what the license might be), but I suspect we need to give some consideration to whether and how that effort is accommodated.
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Peters [mailto:frank.thomas.peters@googlemail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 05:55
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: fpe@openoffice.org
Subject: Re: Wiki for the project
What will happen to the existing wiki at
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
which has quite some content (including
the main documentation pieces)?
Would we maintain two wikis or merge
into Apache infrastructure? How can we
migrate existing content?
I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
have admin rights on the wiki).
Frank
> +1 on the wiki request.
>
> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or do
> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure issue
> tracking system?
>
> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone can
> point me in the right direction.
>
> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for routine
> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do projects
> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Rob
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch> wrote:
>
>> Hi at all
>>
>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations, or we
>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>
>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It is
>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>
>> Greetings Raphael
>> --
>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
Sam said something similar recently, and it is a good thing to learn:
There is nobody to ASK here but your peers. What do YOU think should happen.
Start the discussion with your idea. Seek consensus by starting it.
Cheers,
-g
On Jun 14, 2011 8:55 AM, "Frank Peters" <fr...@googlemail.com>
wrote:
> What will happen to the existing wiki at
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
> which has quite some content (including
> the main documentation pieces)?
>
> Would we maintain two wikis or merge
> into Apache infrastructure? How can we
> migrate existing content?
>
> I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
> have admin rights on the wiki).
>
> Frank
>
>> +1 on the wiki request.
>>
>> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
>> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or
do
>> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure
issue
>> tracking system?
>>
>> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone
can
>> point me in the right direction.
>>
>> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for
routine
>> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do projects
>> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch>
wrote:
>>
>>> Hi at all
>>>
>>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations,
or we
>>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>>
>>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It
is
>>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>>
>>> Greetings Raphael
>>> --
>>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>>
>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Frank Peters <fr...@googlemail.com>.
What will happen to the existing wiki at
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org
which has quite some content (including
the main documentation pieces)?
Would we maintain two wikis or merge
into Apache infrastructure? How can we
migrate existing content?
I'd be eager to help with migration efforts (I
have admin rights on the wiki).
Frank
> +1 on the wiki request.
>
> Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
> something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or do
> we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure issue
> tracking system?
>
> I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone can
> point me in the right direction.
>
> Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for routine
> requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do projects
> typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Rob
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher<r....@gmx.ch> wrote:
>
>> Hi at all
>>
>> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
>> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations, or we
>> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>>
>> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It is
>> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>>
>> Greetings Raphael
>> --
>> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>>
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
+1 on the wiki request.
Mentors,some advice, please, on how we make this happen? Is things
something that PPMC members have rights to do? Or do we ask the IPMC? Or do
we enter a request in the Infrastructure list? Or some Infrastructure issue
tracking system?
I'm volunteering to do the leg work (or is it finger work?) if someone can
point me in the right direction.
Also, what level of approval in the project is typically needed for routine
requests like this? Is a +1 with no objections sufficient? Or do projects
typically have a more elaborate voting procedure for this?
Thanks,
-Rob
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Raphael Bircher <r....@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Hi at all
>
> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations, or we
> get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>
> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It is
> ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>
> Greetings Raphael
> --
> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>
Re: Wiki for the project
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
Please make sure to read all the Incubator documentation. Your question is
generally answered here:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html
We would probably just go with moinmoin for an open wiki. For official
documents produced by us, using a wiki to do the collaboration, we could use
Confluence. Official documents could also use HTML and version control, and
published on our Incubator site.
Cheers,
-g
On Jun 13, 2011 10:06 PM, "Raphael Bircher" <r....@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Hi at all
>
> On http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html there is no
> wiki emptry. We should use the incubator wiki to collect informations,
> or we get a seperate wiki for OOo?
>
> If we have to use the incubator wike, how we have to marke OOo pages. It
> is ok, if every site beginns with "OOo"?
>
> Greetings Raphael
> --
> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/