For what it's worth, it's true that every github repository comes with a [potential] wiki:
https://help.github.com/articles/about-github-wikis/ https://guides.github.com/features/wikis/ https://help.github.com/categories/wiki/ That said, there's no "innate" reason to not use the code.jsoftware.com wiki. But the real issues are not where the pages are hosted, but authorship and maintenance. Wiki hosting is more like rearranging the deck chairs, in comparison. (Also, search engines and blogs adjust to changed urls at a glacial pace and books adjust even more slowly... So I would not be too quick to toss out the old.) -- Raul On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes @Alex, that's the idea I get about it. But I've not used Github at more > than a superficial level, so I don't know how it pans out in practice. I've > used plenty of source-control / cooperative-working software in my time, > trac, svn plus various company homebrews. But they all belong to a bygone > age set against Github's effortless competence. No wonder it's so popular. > > From what I've seen of others' use of it, the greater part of an addon's > documentation, including promotional material, banners, shop-windows, could > be handled by GitHub with greater felicity than the use we're making of > jwiki. Once proven in use, maybe we could abandon jwiki in favour of it – > at least as far as addons are concerned? I've seen whole beginners' courses > (e.g. for Swift, Apple's new Objective-C replacement) delivered on Github. > I've even used it myself to cooperatively write and publish a reference > manual for a minority-interest product. > > It also seems more trustworthy as regards malware payloads, versus, say, > SourceForge. Is that other's experience? Or am I kidding myself? If it's > really so then I'm not sure why. Maybe it boils down to a clientele mostly > prepared to RTFC. > > Ian Clark > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 9:13 PM, Alex Shroyer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> GitHub's Issues interface is good for both alerting a project's >> maintainers, and also for users to get a sense how actively it's being >> maintained. >> >> GitHub has decent mechanisms for transferring ownership of repositories, so >> questionable/abandoned addons could go somewhere out of the way (but still >> publicly available, to encourage fixing) until someone wants to take >> ownership. >> >> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > It might be nice to have a way of marking addons as broken, either >> with a >> > todo/fixme note or maybe just a documented way of deleting them? >> > >> > I think that's a splendid idea. >> > >> > Whenever I engage with an addon I've never used before, it takes me far >> too >> > long to conclude that it's derelict. To stop our treasury of addons >> > degenerating into a midden, I'd welcome an accepted *easy* way of >> alerting >> > the owner – or fellow-users – to broken code (i.e. not a full-blown bug >> > tracker). >> > >> > Am I the only one? Are we going to do something about it? Are we going to >> > finish what we start? >> > >> > What's the best/most obvious alert mechanism? …the Talk page of the >> landing >> > page for the Addon in question at code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Addons >> > <http://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Addons/GitHub> ? This forum? Or >> something >> > Github-based? (and hence over the vendor's horizon)? >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 7:56 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > This looks like a good idea. >> > > >> > > The one suggestion I would have is that this makes it easy to install >> > > broken stuff. Of course, we have already had breakages with system >> > > upgrades - interface changes or removed dependencies can show up as >> > > addons not working right. It might be nice to have a way of marking >> > > addons as broken, either with a todo/fixme note or maybe just a >> > > documented way of deleting them? >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Raul >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:49 PM, chris burke <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > > (This is cross posted to general and programming - please send any >> > > comments >> > > > to general.) >> > > > >> > > > We plan to move the addons source from SVN to github, and at the same >> > > time >> > > > support installs from personal github repos outside the main addons >> > > source. >> > > > See code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Addons/GitHub . >> > > > >> > > > We have this working now, but would appreciate comments before going >> > > ahead, >> > > > thanks. >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> > > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/ >> forums.htm >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
