On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Alexandro Colorado <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Pedro F. Giffuni <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > --- On Tue, 9/27/11, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > As Rob Weir has put it ... >> > ... >> > > > >> > > > So obviously there is limited volunteer bandwidth to >> > > > migrate the wiki. >> > > > And I've heard from several people, on and off >> > > > the list, that much of what is on the wiki is >> > > > not very useful. >> > > > >> > > >> > > uh, well...I don't know bout this. I was under the >> > > impression that MUCH of developer info was here. >> > > Others would need to weigh in but I think it was >> > > widely used because of the ease of use. >> > > >> > Just my word of advice: >> > >> > Check the MediaWiki at http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/ >> > >> > If we take out information about Hg (dead), >> > the Development Teams and Projects (which will have to >> > be reorganized), Old News, the issue tracker ... >> > >> > Is the information left worth it to run through a >> > MW-->CWiki conversion effort? >> > >> >> Yes, the projects need some reorganization, but I doubt if all the >> development stuff should be removed. It simply hasn't gone anywhere -- >> yet. >> The problem is NOT the conversion effort (a one time deal) but the >> maintenance effort. >> >> *IF* someone(s) would step up to be the MW guru, there wouldn't be an >> issue >> but we're outside the "infra" workings. >> > > Well then we should look for that guru. So far I havent event seen clearly > what things do we actually need. Maybe we need to come to the decision we > need to get a MW administrator. Clayton was our administrator, if he want to > train the new administrator then we wont need such a guru. AFAIK he left > open the option of doing some light mentoring on the administration. > > > >> >> >> > I think given the license situation we should just >> > leave that stuff as read-only for now and do all new >> > work on CWiki (or MoinMoin). >> > >> >> Well OK, good enough and I would agree with this. >> After looking at the old wiki this am, it seems someone from the "es" area >> has made quite a few changes/additions, and the front page itself had been >> modified this am. Of course, there was that "throw pillows" page >> addition??! >> >> and ps. Does anyone here actually know HOW to put the old wiki in >> read-only??? >> > > Usually to do a backup of the wiki, you are supposed to make it read only. > Is a configuration line in the .conf file. > http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Backing_up_a_wiki > I paste the wrong link, is actually: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgReadOnly > > > >> >> >> > Pedro. >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> MzK >> >> "There is no such thing as coincidence." >> -- Leroy Jethro Gibbs, Rule #39 >> > > > > -- > *Alexandro Colorado* > *OpenOffice.org* Español > http://es.openoffice.org > fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6 > > -- *Alexandro Colorado* *OpenOffice.org* Español http://es.openoffice.org fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
