Hi TJ, Have a look at the "Re: [wiki] Migration - A TerryE Clipping Collection [LONG]" thread.
Anyone thinking about playing with CWiki is thinking it is a Plan B. MWiki is still Plan A. For me the CWiki was the only choice until Terry E showed up and did his tremendous work! Since he "left" some are concerned and a Plan B becomes something they would like to work on. Perhaps they can work on Plan A instead? We need more than Drew! Regards, Dave On Sep 8, 2011, at 3:11 PM, TJ Frazier wrote: > On 9/6/2011 18:12, Rob Weir wrote: >> Moving this point to its own thread >> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:03 PM, drew<[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 17:30 -0400, TJ Frazier wrote: >>>> On 9/6/2011 13:43, Matt Richards wrote: >>>>> Well, I thought Terry has resigned from the project according to another >>>>> thread, leaving the wiki migration at a bit of a stand still. Figured I >>>>> could step in and pick up where he left off on this. Am I able to, as a >>>>> non-contributor reach out to Apache Infra on this (from what I read it >>>>> seems >>>>> the infra ML are for existing contributors only)? Not sure who all is >>>>> involved at this point. >>>> >>>> As Pedro commented, you don't need a newbie to help with the conversion. >>>> But in the long run, I volunteer to learn whatever is needed to support >>>> the MW system. All I have to offer is that I am a sysop on the live >>>> wiki, > <snip> >> Another option to consider is that of content translation: MediaWiki >> to Confluence. Remember. Confluence is fully supported by Apache >> Infra. We would also find a lot of people on the list who could help >> write and test wiki text conversion code. It is just string >> manipulation, right? How hard can that be? Even I can help with >> that. >> >> But seriously, the MW plans were always precarious. We did not have a >> deep bench of expertise on the sys admin side of that package. Even >> if we have a volunteer or two step in now, aren't we still rather >> thin? Wouldn't we still be one "life change" away from being back >> where we are now? But if we can figure out a content-level migration >> to Confluence wiki, then we would have something much more sustainable >> long term. >> >> Just an idea. >> >> -Rob >> > My question is, "Is it worth looking at Confluence Wiki /at all?/ " > > Q: Why does everybody use Cwiki? > A: Infra supports it. > Q: Why does Infra support Cwiki? > A: Everybody uses it. > Hmm. "Very interesting," as Arte Johnson used to say. > > *Personal gripes.* > My biggest gripe with Cwiki is the help; the file is neither searchable nor > editable (do that in Mwiki to see how an example /really/ works); it is also > in need of some serious editing. (To be fair, I have not yet explored their > User Guide, but I will.) It is not clear to me that Apache users are best > served by Confluence. > > *Conversion problems.* > Terry sized this as "man-years of effort". I agree. > Going the other way (Cwiki to Mwiki) should be, as Rob wrote, "just string > manipulation", because MW is richer in features than CW, so a good > translation possibility exists. It may not exist in reverse. > > One big snag is the MW templates, which are used for everything from > copyright attribution to inter-page tables of contents. Given that the output > of any MW artifact is displayable HTML, it is /possible/ to convert to a CW > page that looks exactly like the MW page. However, offering the functionality > of being able to add a line to a TOC template, and have everything else > happen automatically ... that's hard. (Please note that 'possible' != > 'reasonable'.) > > Then there are smaller things, like sortable tables (on all columns, too!). > In MW, that's 'class = "prettytable"' -> 'class = "prettytable sortable"'; > just add the one word. <snide> Can CW do it at all? </snide> > > The <math> ... </math> feature is of some use in explaining the more abstruse > Calc functions (in FAQ pages). The major user is the Math Guide's wiki > version. (I maintain that document.) Not really an essential element, but > nice. > > I have little doubt that a serious conversion survey will turn up a number of > such problems. > > *Migration problems.* > There are some technical problems with the migration (that is, running MW at > Apache); most of those appear to have short- and long-term solutions. I will > save the details for a more technical thread, and/or the wiki. > -- > /tj/ >
