I also vote on avoiding Confluence. > I think a static site and a wiki are somewhat orthogonal things.
I believe even the old wiki needed a login for edit. Using a GitHub PR /might/ be good enough for the technical articles. --emi >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: Re: DevFaq wiki update >Local Time: 10 January 2018 8:58 PM >UTC Time: 10 January 2018 18:58 >From: [email protected] >To: [email protected] > >On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 at 18:41 Matthias Bläsing [email protected] >wrote: > >>And before someone says "github will stay forever", sourceforge used >> its market value for bad marketing (bundle free software with an >> malware installing installer) and if enough money is offered, github >> and co will go down the same way. >> > To be fair they have a rather different business model, but the suggestion > was made because it's easy to do now, and because it's backed by a git > repo. It's no more reliant on GitHub than doing the bulk of managing our > source code there, and probably easier to move if need be - there are other > potential git-based wiki systems we could migrate to (eg. >https://github.com/gollum/gollum came up while looking at this), and we > could if necessary use some system for triggering a static build on commit > ... but, while I agree the website should be a static site, I think a > static site and a wiki are somewhat orthogonal things. What are the other > options for keeping the essential wiki-ness in your view? > > Best wishes, > > Neil > > > > > >Neil C Smith > Artist & Technologist >www.neilcsmith.net > > Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
