Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Hi. 2012/6/5 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com: If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki Juergen +1 Albino
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 6/10/12 10:36 PM, Paulo de Souza Lima wrote:
2012/6/10 TJ Frazier tjfraz...@cfl.rr.com
On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote:
Hi, Kay,
IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a
parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than
categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less
convenient, but gives you more control. You /can/ create child pages, using
the slash (/) notation; see my user page [1] for several examples. On the
child page, you get breadcrumbs at the top.
While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; it's
good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, it
gets harder to find.
[1]
http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**TJFrazierhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier
/tj/
Hi. My 2 cents:
If you want to take advantage of Mediawiki's semantic capabilities, there's
no need to create child pages. There are a lot of cool stuff that can be
used to perform the tasks required in this thread.
the hierarchical structure has some advantages to organize articles that
are related to the same topic. For example the Developer's Guide is
organized this way and it allows to easy run wiki bots on the DevGuide only.
The {{DISPLAYTITLE:your short title}} template can be used to reduce
the visible title.
But using the right categories allows further useful tooling and
filtering of articles.
Juergen
Cheers
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: +1 on MediaWiki The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the migration and it was concluded that would not be done. �Kay Schenk might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and experience since. �- Dennis Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion. I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth. I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless of what it is. Mostly I use the Project Planning area. So, +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc. gets moved I would like to add one more thought/request on this topic. I've actually used Confluence -- the cwiki environment -- more over the course of my wiki work than MediaWiki, but there are pros and cons to each. What I REALLY like about our current cwiki setup, is the apparently automatic navigation generation feature. So, when you add a page under a category, you can quickly see what other pages are there for that area. This makes putting ideas out there very quick and efficient. I don't know MW provides in this this regard. But features like this make using cwki for planning pretty easy since there's no futzing with filing into categories etc. SO, if there is a way to do this same kind of thin in MW, we should definitely enable such a feature. � -Original Message- From: J�rgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@googlemail.com mailto:jogischm...@googlemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 00:37 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org mailto:ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote: KG01 - See comments inline. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh chen...@apache.org mailto:chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page �has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them... KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is painful and inefficient. it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places all over the wiki. If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki Juergen So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of �https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo include these areas. KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on development in the open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important, however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote: On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: +1 on MediaWiki The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the migration and it was concluded that would not be done. �Kay Schenk might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and experience since. �- Dennis Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion. I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth. I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless of what it is. Mostly I use the Project Planning area. So, +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc. gets moved I would like to add one more thought/request on this topic. I've actually used Confluence -- the cwiki environment -- more over the course of my wiki work than MediaWiki, but there are pros and cons to each. What I REALLY like about our current cwiki setup, is the apparently automatic navigation generation feature. So, when you add a page under a category, you can quickly see what other pages are there for that area. This makes putting ideas out there very quick and efficient. I don't know MW provides in this this regard. But features like this make using cwki for planning pretty easy since there's no futzing with filing into categories etc. SO, if there is a way to do this same kind of thin in MW, we should definitely enable such a feature. Hi, Kay, IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less convenient, but gives you more control. You /can/ create child pages, using the slash (/) notation; see my user page [1] for several examples. On the child page, you get breadcrumbs at the top. While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; it's good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, it gets harder to find. [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier /tj/
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
2012/6/10 TJ Frazier tjfraz...@cfl.rr.com On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote: Hi, Kay, IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less convenient, but gives you more control. You /can/ create child pages, using the slash (/) notation; see my user page [1] for several examples. On the child page, you get breadcrumbs at the top. While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; it's good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, it gets harder to find. [1] http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**TJFrazierhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier /tj/ Hi. My 2 cents: If you want to take advantage of Mediawiki's semantic capabilities, there's no need to create child pages. There are a lot of cool stuff that can be used to perform the tasks required in this thread. Cheers -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM, TJ Frazier tjfraz...@cfl.rr.com wrote: On 6/10/2012 12:51, Kay Schenk wrote: On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.**orgdennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: +1 on MediaWiki The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the migration and it was concluded that would not be done. �Kay Schenk might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and experience since. �- Dennis Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion. I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth. I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless of what it is. Mostly I use the Project Planning area. So, +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc. gets moved I would like to add one more thought/request on this topic. I've actually used Confluence -- the cwiki environment -- more over the course of my wiki work than MediaWiki, but there are pros and cons to each. What I REALLY like about our current cwiki setup, is the apparently automatic navigation generation feature. So, when you add a page under a category, you can quickly see what other pages are there for that area. This makes putting ideas out there very quick and efficient. I don't know MW provides in this this regard. But features like this make using cwki for planning pretty easy since there's no futzing with filing into categories etc. SO, if there is a way to do this same kind of thin in MW, we should definitely enable such a feature. Hi, Kay, IIUC, the automatic nav in cwiki is a genealogical thing: every page has a parent, and that's what the nav display shows. That is easier than categories — if you only want one category for that page. Mwiki is less convenient, but gives you more control. Well that's what the popular opinion here seems to be. You /can/ create child pages, using the slash (/) notation; see my user page [1] for several examples. On the child page, you get breadcrumbs at the top. OK, I'll look at this While I admit I'm biased, I doubt that the cwiki nav scales well; I can't speak to that. I sued it in my former employment. But, it was not the public facing entity. I know MW is really that among other things. it's good for a small number of pages, but as the information gets richer, it gets harder to find. OK, thanks for this information. I actually did try to find some information about the navigator path business in the MW docs, but nothing jumped out at me. I fully realize that maintaining these two entities for our use is NOT optimal. Not at all. I'm fine with exclusive use of MW thought I will miss some of the cwiki features. [1] http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/User:**TJFrazierhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TJFrazier /tj/ -- MzK Everything will be all right in the end... if it's not all right then it's not the end. -- Sonny, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 6/5/12 9:13 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home Here is the history: The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created. Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it. The two new wikis were: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+HomeThis was the community wiki where anyone could create an account and edit content. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This wiki was restricted to committers. The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under ALv2. If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the license issue.And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki today. we can put a disclaimer on each existing page where the license situation is unclear. For all new stuff we require ALv2. We can make this sure by a clear license info page for future contributions. And during the registration process for new users we can ask for accepting the license for new contributions as well to make sure that all new registered users are aligned. Existing users can be notified to renew their account and acknowledge the license change or their account get deleted. Just an idea Juergen -Rob scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 06.06.2012 05:57, imacat wrote: It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one. But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just moving. Agreed. Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. Please see e.g. http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangeslimit=500 which shows that most of the changelog entries are caused by these Annoybots subscribing about 50 dummy users every day. I'm not sure if this is critical because it could blow up the service but browsing the recent changes list feels like analyzing the contents of a garbage bin instead of a hey these are interesting updates moment. Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that really want our project to die and put some effort into it. When our three Wikis get overhauled this should be a consideration. Herbert
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Hi all, chengjh schrieb: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. I see such new content already in the MediaWiki. In the beginning I thought cwiki would be the right place for project content. But in reality people use the MediaWiki. For example the new start of UX, use of SVN, explanation to DrawingLayer changes, where written in the MediaWiki. MediaWiki use is common and many people know to use. You can easily get help on using it and converter exists, in contrast to Cwiki. MediaWiki has a lot of features which make it attractive to readers and editors as well. Do you know, that the MediaWiki has about 11000 pages? The problem is not that some of them are outdated. The problem of outdated content would arise with a new, active used wiki very quickly too. The problem is to have members, which feel responsible for an area. There are parts in the MediaWiki which you cannot simple discontinue, for example the Developer's Guide (linked from the SDK) and the Calc functions reference (linked from the help). For that reasons, I favor to use the MediaWiki as the only Wiki and drop the use of CWiki. Kind regards Regina
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
Herbert Duerr wrote: Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. ... Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that really want our project to die and put some effort into it. I don't really know whether spam attacks are made to deliberately damage this project or just to spam, but it's simpler to believe they are just spam. What is interesting/amusing is that I noticed a consistent pattern of spam registrations in the OpenOffice and LibreOffice wikis over the last weeks (i.e., the same extremely long username being registered on one wiki and, just seconds/minutes later, on the other one). So at least the two projects have common spammers! Now it would be really nice to cooperate on fighting spam, since this just involves good will and common sense and it does not interfere with licenses, contributor agreements, corporate interests... Regards, Andrea.
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
2012/6/6 Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de Hi all, Herbert Duerr schrieb: On 06.06.2012 05:57, imacat wrote: It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one. But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just moving. Agreed. Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. Please see e.g. http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/w/index.php?** title=Special:RecentChanges**limit=500http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangeslimit=500 which shows that most of the changelog entries are caused by these Annoybots subscribing about 50 dummy users every day. I'm not sure if this is critical because it could blow up the service but browsing the recent changes list feels like analyzing the contents of a garbage bin instead of a hey these are interesting updates moment. Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that really want our project to die and put some effort into it. When our three Wikis get overhauled this should be a consideration. Can we restrict the account creation as described in http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**Manual:Preventing_access#** Restrict_account_creationhttp://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Preventing_access#Restrict_account_creation You need no account to read the Wiki, so its purpose giving support is not restricted. Kind regards Regina Hummm... That could prevent new contributors to join the project, but have no interest in joining something more, let's say, official. For example: people who write tutorials, tips and tricks, people who make individual efforts locally and so on. There are other ways to block bots and fake users. Best regards. -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 2012/06/06 19:56, Paulo de Souza Lima said: 2012/6/6 Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de Hi all, Herbert Duerr schrieb: On 06.06.2012 05:57, imacat wrote: It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one. But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just moving. Agreed. Speaking of the OOo/AOO Wiki community the Wiki has been a target of attacks by Spambots or Annoybots for a long time. Please see e.g. http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/w/index.php?** title=Special:RecentChanges**limit=500http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangeslimit=500 which shows that most of the changelog entries are caused by these Annoybots subscribing about 50 dummy users every day. I'm not sure if this is critical because it could blow up the service but browsing the recent changes list feels like analyzing the contents of a garbage bin instead of a hey these are interesting updates moment. Whatever is decided to become the new Wiki I hope it is more resilient against these attacks as we are a high profile target getting plenty of page hits on the Wiki and there are also some people that really want our project to die and put some effort into it. When our three Wikis get overhauled this should be a consideration. Can we restrict the account creation as described in http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**Manual:Preventing_access#** Restrict_account_creationhttp://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Preventing_access#Restrict_account_creation You need no account to read the Wiki, so its purpose giving support is not restricted. Kind regards Regina Hummm... That could prevent new contributors to join the project, but have no interest in joining something more, let's say, official. For example: people who write tutorials, tips and tricks, people who make individual efforts locally and so on. There are other ways to block bots and fake users. Best regards. Thanks for reminding us the spam problem. Luckily, the spam bots seems to only register new users currently, but not destroying the content. I shall see if finer CAPTCHA can be implemented to the MediaWiki. I do not favor closing its new account registration. If we want to keep it, we need new users to update it. Please also remember that there is no multilingual site design on the current cwiki. If we want to replace the current MediaWiki with CWiki, multilingual site design must be enabled on CWiki. -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: +1 on MediaWiki The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the migration and it was concluded that would not be done. Kay Schenk might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and experience since. - Dennis Well, oddly, I don't have much of a dissenting opinion. I personally don't use the OO MW much, but have been using the cwiki a lot. I find it less quirky than MW to tell you the truth. I would be much much better to only maintain ONE wiki though regardless of what it is. Mostly I use the Project Planning area. So, +1 on only one wiki, and given the scope of MW over cwiki, I'm happy to go with MW providing the existing info -- marketing, planning, etc. gets moved -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@googlemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 00:37 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote: KG01 - See comments inline. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,thatmeans a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them... KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is painful and inefficient. it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places all over the wiki. If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki Juergen So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo include these areas. KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on development in the open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important, however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to a newer wiki tool. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng -- MzK Everything will be all right in the end... if it's not all right then it's not the end. -- Sonny, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote: KG01 - See comments inline. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them... KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is painful and inefficient. it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places all over the wiki. If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki Juergen So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo include these areas. KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on development in the open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important, however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to a newer wiki tool. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote: KG01 - See comments inline. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them... KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is painful and inefficient. it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places all over the wiki. If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki Juergen +1 for going with Mediawiki simply because of it's feature set. Cheers G So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo include these areas. KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on development in the open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important, however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to a newer wiki tool. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
2012/6/5 Graham Lauder y...@apache.org it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places all over the wiki. If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki Juergen +1 for going with Mediawiki simply because of it's feature set. Cheers G +1 for Mediawiki. -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729
RE: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
+1 on MediaWiki The convergence on the Community Wiki was considered early in the migration and it was concluded that would not be done. Kay Schenk might have much to add on that, based on her interest then and experience since. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@googlemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 00:37 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki On 6/5/12 5:11 AM, Kevin Grignon wrote: KG01 - See comments inline. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them... KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is painful and inefficient. it would be indeed nice to have only one wiki. We have unresolved issues with the old wiki content (unclear licenses) but MediaWiki as underlying wiki software offers more features as far as I can see and the editing is smoother for me. Very useful extensions are used in several places all over the wiki. If possible I would prefer to move forward with MediaWiki Juergen So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo include these areas. KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on development in the open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important, however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to a newer wiki tool. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home Here is the history: The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created. Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it. The two new wikis were: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+HomeThis was the community wiki where anyone could create an account and edit content. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This wiki was restricted to committers. The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under ALv2. If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the license issue.And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki today. -Rob scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
KG01 - see comments inline. On Jun 6, 2012, at 3:13 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home Here is the history: The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created. Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it. The two new wikis were: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+HomeThis was the community wiki where anyone could create an account and edit content. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This wiki was restricted to committers. The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under ALv2. If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the license issue.And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki today. -Rob KG01 - While I appreciate that wiki-oriented design and development resources are scarce, we should consider forming a swat team to sort this out. As a distributed team we need usable tools and useful info. To help orient readers, and make active versus archival material distinct, we should consider a rapid visual refresh, or some other predominant visual affordable. The current document: outdated is not predominant enough. scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
I have no opinion whether to join the two Wikis, or discard the current MediaWiki. Actually, the current content on MediaWiki is quite outdated and misleading. We may need significant amount of effort to keep the MediaWiki dated. If we want to keep MediaWiki, we may need to discard a large amount of the content and start from beginning. However, I would like to remind you that, some nice people here are already starting this work. If we want to discard MediaWiki, we may need to consider how to move the whole Wiki community, not just the Wiki content. It's relatively easy to start a new Wiki or discard an existing one. But to form and keep a live Wiki community is a lot harder than just moving. On 2012/06/06 09:45, Kevin Grignon said: KG01 - see comments inline. On Jun 6, 2012, at 3:13 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home Here is the history: The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created. Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it. The two new wikis were: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+HomeThis was the community wiki where anyone could create an account and edit content. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This wiki was restricted to committers. The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under ALv2. If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the license issue.And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki today. -Rob KG01 - While I appreciate that wiki-oriented design and development resources are scarce, we should consider forming a swat team to sort this out. As a distributed team we need usable tools and useful info. To help orient readers, and make active versus archival material distinct, we should consider a rapid visual refresh, or some other predominant visual affordable. The current document: outdated is not predominant enough. scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ Apache OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
On Jun 5, 2012, at 6:45 PM, Kevin Grignon wrote: KG01 - see comments inline. On Jun 6, 2012, at 3:13 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them...So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the We actually already have a 3rd wiki, for developers: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home Here is the history: The MediaWiki instance was the legacy wiki, used by OpenOffce.org project When the Apache project was create, we had two new wiki's created. Remember at that time we had not yet migrated the MediaWiki over to Apache, and it was not certain whether we would be able to do it. The two new wikis were: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+HomeThis was the community wiki where anyone could create an account and edit content. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This wiki was restricted to committers. The OOODEV wiki made it suitable for content that might make it into a product release. For example logos, draft help, etc. If this was put on an open wiki, where anyone would access it, then we'd need to do much more work to track permissions if we wanted to move something from the wiki into SVN for use in a release. Having a wiki that was only writable by committers ensure that the content is always under ALv2. If we want to go to a single wiki, I think we should resolve the license issue.And we should also encourage CTR by ensuring that there is an email notification for changes. We do that for CWiki today. -Rob KG01 - While I appreciate that wiki-oriented design and development resources are scarce, we should consider forming a swat team to sort this out. As a distributed team we need usable tools and useful info. To help orient readers, and make active versus archival material distinct, we should consider a rapid visual refresh, or some other predominant visual affordable. The current document: outdated is not predominant enough. Rob's description is entirely correct. He does leave out some of the detail which is basically for whatever reason the former Admin of the wiki and forum did not take well to the Apache way. He DID step up and get it migrated and Terry E's effort is much appreciated, It is good that imacat has stepped up to fulfill the role of sysadmin for the MediaWiki. Anyone else? I'll add that the OOODEV CWiki has been barely used, it should certainly be dropped and any existing content moved to OOOUSERS Regards, Dave scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home to include these areas. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Propose to Integrate Old OO Wiki and New AOO Wiki
KG01 - See comments inline. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:35 AM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: Hi, We see,the old OpenOffice.org wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Page has accumulated plenty of valuable information,including planning,function specification,technical documents and so on..Currently,the planning and project tracking parts have been moved to https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Home,that means a new start of the project.Because the two wikis are two different wiki software systems,moreover, there are existing different writing styles between them and writers need accounts for them respectively, it is not convenient for writers to write wiki articles when switching between them... KG01 - Yes, attempting to manage and maintain content on two wikis is painful and inefficient. So, I propose to create a new wiki for developers to record technical documents,technical review,proposals/ideas,function specification and design,and so on by sub-project categories, for example,we can move the scope of teams section from the old OO wiki to the new wiki, or *extend the scope of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Wiki+Hometo include these areas. KG01 - While I appreciate that there is a focus on development in the open source world, I would suggest that the effort is much broader. I personally prefer open source product development ;) Delivering sustainable, compelling and delightful products is the domain of an interdisciplinary team, not just technical folks. Any future wiki strategy should address the needs of all project stakeholders and contributors. *Thus, in the future,the new wiki will only keep a link to the old OO wiki which takes as the history data and continue to accumulate new project data to benefit the project and contributors..Please comment...thanks. KG01 - Archiving older content as is, and including references from the new wiki makes sense. A one-time migration of relevant data would be important, however, any older content could be left as is in the archives. To help differentiate old versus new, we might consider a different tool. As a better user experience is important, this seems like a good time to move to a newer wiki tool. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
