On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 08/01/2011 03:09 PM, C wrote: >> >> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 23:46, Rob Weir<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Another key question is that of accounts. �Who will have write access >>> to the wiki? >>> >>> 1) We preserve the accounts of the Oracle-hosted server and anyone who >>> has an account there has one at Apache? >> >> The accounts take up little "room" and are simply part of the OOoWiki >> backend.. not linked to any external LDAP. Should they be... >> probably. It would certainly be a nice to have if we could link the >> OOo Accounts to the main OOo accounts.. one log in for all bits of >> OOo. > > +1 !!! > >> >> As an aside, there are more than 10k (probably more like 20k) of what >> I call zombie accounts, accounts that are more than 2 years old and >> never been used to edit a page, and never even logged into after they >> were created. A huge number of the zombie accounts are created by >> spammers.... it wouldn't be a bad thing if we purged the unused >> accounts, but it's not necessary. >> >>> 2) We start fresh and allow anyone to sign up? >> >> How do you preserve the existing content and the continuity of the >> previous editors' work of you do that? If you start fresh, you no >> longer have any contributor history on the existing content. >> >> >>> 3) We hook it up to Apache's LDAP, and only allow project committers >>> to write to the wiki? >> >> That doesn't make it much of a community project. > > no -- it doesn't. The wiki should be much more community oriented, as a wiki > should! Good point "C". > > The whole point of >> >> a Wiki is to allow anyone to edit and add content. Parts of the >> Documentation for example has been added by people who were not >> associated directly with the Doc project, (see >> >> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Reference/Calc_functions_alpha >> for an example) and their contributions are pretty important. Another >> group that I haven't seen represented here on the Incubators list is a >> subset of the Russian OOo community that have created a massive >> documentation structure on the Wiki over the past 2 years or so (see >> >> http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fpersonas.i-rs.ru%2Fblog%2Fnews%2F270.html >> for some info on this). I don't think they would be contributing >> their knowledge if we made them apply for and become Apache project >> committers... but maybe I'm too cynical. > > No, you're not too cynical, you're right on. The point is this. There are > SOME areas of OO.o that are controlled by svn, like the main web site > pages,. But, at some point, various projects, like Documentation, and the > Brazil NL project, for example, decided they didn't want or need the hassle > of all this formal control, and went to the wiki specifically to GET more > community involvement. There is no need to impose control where it's not > really needed. >
It is good that you acknowledge that at OOo there were some areas that were controlled by SVN and could not be modified by everyone. Obviously different open source foundations or forges or projects will make this determination in different ways. At Apache, the requirement is described as: "Using A Wiki To Create Documentation Podlings may use a wiki to create documentation (including the website) providing that follow the guidelines. In particular, care must be taken to ensure that access to the wiki used to create documentation is restricted to only those with filed CLAs. The PPMC MUST review all changes and ensure that trust is not abused." http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html So documentation is special. And a lot of what I see on the OOo is documentation, for end users as well as developers. Build instructions, component architecture overviews, FAQ's, Admin Guides, etc. These are all forms of project documentation. I don't see how we avoid limiting write access to those pages. Remember, the thing that ensures that someone can take an Apache project and create a new distribution or a new derivative of it, is the Apache 2,0 license. That ensures that they can take the code, the documentation, translations, etc., and reuse it. This includes the documentation. >> >> >>> I think this boils down to: �is this a project wiki with project work >>> in it? �Or is it a community wiki? �What do we need to ensure that the >>> PPMC has oversight of project outputs and that our users have the >>> rights they think they have to those outputs, which is to say, that >>> new content remains under Apache 2.0? >> >> The OOo Wiki, as it is now, is a Community Wiki. It contains pages >> created by the projects for project use, pages created by the >> projects for users, and pages created by users for users. Some is old >> and could/should be trimmed out, but... there is also some very >> valuable and important information tucked away in the Wiki. >> >> C. > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > MzK > > "If you can keep your head when all others around you > are losing theirs - maybe you don't fully understand > the situation!" > -- Unknown >
