* Brendan Gregg - Sun Microsystems <brendan at Sun.COM> [2007-05-31 14:20]:
> G'Day Folks,
> 
> On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 01:11:21PM -0700, Stephen Hahn wrote:
> > * Christopher Frost <frostcs at gmail.com> [2007-05-31 12:55]:
> > >   We have been brainstorming a little bit recently about the direction of
> > > a Wiki being integrated into the OpenSolaris Structure.
> > > 
> > > Currently we have a brief option listing at 
> > > http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolarisWiki
> > > Which any volunteer/community-member has a right to comment on.
> > > 
> > > I will be proposing a community sponsored project in the immediate
> > > future and hope to gather a few more volunteers, a few more comments,
> > > and perhaps a the support of the tools community.
> > > 
> > > I feel this is something the community should have input in, and not
> > > just internal Sun staff. The Sun staff should take part in the
> > > community, not have the community take part in Sun.
> > > 
> > > Feel free to speak your mind.
> > 
> >   The Tools CG already sponsors the Website Project for specifically
> >   this purpose.  A key aspect of a new project proposal (that expects to
> >   gain Tools CG sponsorship) would be to answer what deficits in the
> >   existing project motivate the creation of a new one, and what attempts
> >   were made to correct those deficits previously by the proposers?
> 
> This seems reasonable (although I'm probably not the best person to 
> answer):
> 
> Deficits in the existing OpenSolaris editor (Tonic editor?):
> 
>       - ACLs
>       - edit history, revision diffs
>       - good markup language (a better TML?)
>       - section edits
>       - export to XML (PDF, DocBook)
>       - customisable look-and-feel
>       - performance issues (timeouts, latency)
> 
> Any of the leading wikis, such as MediaWiki, would solve most or all of
> these.
> 
> What attempts were made to correct these so far:
> 
> I don't know who has tried what exactly. It would be news to me if all
> of these can be fixed on the current software.

  Just to be clear:  these are deficits in the software, not deficits of
  the effort to improve and operate the software.  The set of items
  under consideration for the latter include the mail forums, the file
  hosting, the SCM hosting, workflow development, and so forth.  The
  document content is a single component in that set.

  There has been previous mail on our efforts to get the source out, so
  that we can have a technical discussion on how to excise old
  components and replace them with new ones.  Starting a parallel
  project that ignores our current technical state may or may not be
  complete; to be honest, I'm having trouble reconciling the desire for
  finite project lengths with the existence of obviously long-running
  efforts.

  In my recollection, 

  http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/website-discuss/2007-March/003119.html

  was the most recent message on the source release; as I understand it,
  we're going through various time-expensive Legal processes to complete
  this work.

  - Stephen

-- 
sch at sun.com  http://blogs.sun.com/sch/

Reply via email to