There are also lots of benefits of not using cwiki: * ability to work offline (that's really a problem with confluence) * ability to experiment using branches * ability to version documentation easily * ability to modify several pages at once * ability to better track contributions
On the last one, I actually think giving people modification rights is not necessarily a good idea. People should be able to become committers but simply contributing doc. Do you monitor all the doc changes on cxf / camel made by non committers ? And actually, how many modifications are we talking about ? Last, we had a vote on that a few months ago, so please go read the discussions, as Jean-Baptiste explained, we had some discussions and came to a conclusion ... We were using cwiki until a few months. On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:19, Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net> wrote: > I know that I have proposed this before and then got the answer that this > was discussed already. Still I have the feeling that everybody dislikes the > current way we build our website.... so again a try :-)... > > I would even go a step farther and do as much of the website on the wiki as > possible. Dan Kulp has written an exporter script that syncs the wiki to > static pages so the admins can live with it. > > I think we have to try to make the website and documentation as open as > possible. The wiki allows us to give editing right to anyone with a valid > icla. That is much more accessible than the current site. > Additionally any change can be seen right after the change on the wiki. I > think that is a big motivation. Currently you have to submit a patch for the > website and wait for someone to commit it and then for someeone else to sync > it to the web. This process can take months sometimes. That is quite > frustrating and I am sure it is the reason why we have so few updates to the > site and documentation. > Another nice thing of the wiki is that it is a first step of contribution > below submitting patches. So people can come in contact with the project > gradually. > > Of course the wiki has the problem that it is not synched to the releases > but in cxf and camel this is also not the case. Still it works well there. > The way to couple the documentation to releases is to note for example which > attribute of a command has been introduced in which version. This is niot > perfect but works quite well in practice. > > Christian > > > Am 17.06.2011 09:46, schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré: >> >> Agree Andreas, >> >> I think that: >> - link to the wiki "cap" page in the community area of the website >> - wiki pages as children of the "cap" page >> >> is the most efficient way. >> >> Regards >> JB > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > http://www.talend.com > > -- ------------------------ Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
