Re: [Wikitech-l] [AI] New ORES FAQ
(dropped ai@ from the CC) On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Gergo Tiszawrote: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Aaron Halfaker > wrote: > >> I thought Wikitech makes sense for a wikimedia-specific initiative. >> > > A documentation SIG is not really Wikimedia-specific though (or did you > mean "ORES documentation SIG" specifically?). Sarah is working on technical writing projects related specifically to ORES and Cloud Services this quarter (and hopefully for many more quarters to come). This work is part of the "technical community building" program from the Technology department's annual plan [0]. Sarah can jump in to say more, but my understanding is that the initial work of the SIGDOCS is intended to be focused pretty narrowly on ORES, Cloud VPS, and Toolforge. That certainly does not mean that we do not have other documentation gaps (we do) or that others are barred from organizing to work on things like MediaWiki API docs (they are not). It does mean however that we are making choices about focus with the hope that this will help make more actionable plans about which docs to work on first and what sort of work to do. > Also, most Wikimedia-specific technology initiatives are on mw.org (all the > Audiences projects, for example). Where the tracking page for SIGDOCS lives is probably the least important issue related to organizing the group, but I think your point is well taken. > Due to being managed differently, wikitech is not a great work environment > IMO. There is no unified login, no page translation support, no structured > discussion support, no pageview metrics, the registration process is tied > to creating LDAP and shell accounts... There are plans to improve this > eventually [1], but between that and the audience differences, I'd stay > away for now. All of this is true, but then also very false when you learn that improving the Cloud VPS and Toolforge docs is at least 50% of the project to be undertaken. I'd like to second Gergo's initial enthusiasm about Sarah stepping up to help organize work on documentation. She has a great background in technical writing as individual contributor and experience in teaching writing related topics that I hope we can all leverage to get better at the craft of making clear and useful documentation. [0] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2017-2018/Draft/Programs/Technology#Program_4:_Technical_community_building > [1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T123425 Bryan -- Bryan Davis Wikimedia Foundation [[m:User:BDavis_(WMF)]] Manager, Cloud Services Boise, ID USA irc: bd808v:415.839.6885 x6855 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] [AI] New ORES FAQ
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Salmo_trutta.jpg Please stay on topic. This thread is about the ORES FAQ. If you would like to debate about Which Wiki Is The Right Wiki for SIGDOCS, please start a new thread. I'm sure Sarah will be happy to discuss the initiative and its history in that thread. On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Gergo Tiszawrote: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Aaron Halfaker > wrote: > >> I thought Wikitech makes sense for a wikimedia-specific initiative. >> > > A documentation SIG is not really Wikimedia-specific though (or did you > mean "ORES documentation SIG" specifically?). > Also, most Wikimedia-specific technology initiatives are on mw.org (all > the Audiences projects, for example). > > Wikitech was originally a place for ops documentation. (It has its own > infrastructure and deploy cadence, so it's unaffected by most failures; > also it's small enough for static HTML dumps. When the site is down and you > are scrambling to bring it back, it's a good thing when your operations > docs aren't also down.) Later Labs needed a management interface which got > tucked onto Wikitech (this was one of those "do everything inside > MediaWiki" eras), so it made sense to put all Labs-related documentation on > wikitech as well. Most other things are on mediawiki.org. There were > various proposals over the years to change that (move wikitech content to > mediawiki.org, move all WMF stuff to wikitech, move all WMF stuff to > meta, move all non-MediaWiki-documentation stuff to a new developer wiki > etc.) but none of them gained much momentum. > > Due to being managed differently, wikitech is not a great work environment > IMO. There is no unified login, no page translation support, no structured > discussion support, no pageview metrics, the registration process is tied > to creating LDAP and shell accounts... There are plans to improve this > eventually [1], but between that and the audience differences, I'd stay > away for now. > > Btw you are probably aware of the past discussion on a documentation SIG, > but just in case: [2] > > > [1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T123425 > [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T156301 > > ___ > AI mailing list > a...@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ai > > ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] [AI] New ORES FAQ
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Aaron Halfakerwrote: > I thought Wikitech makes sense for a wikimedia-specific initiative. > A documentation SIG is not really Wikimedia-specific though (or did you mean "ORES documentation SIG" specifically?). Also, most Wikimedia-specific technology initiatives are on mw.org (all the Audiences projects, for example). Wikitech was originally a place for ops documentation. (It has its own infrastructure and deploy cadence, so it's unaffected by most failures; also it's small enough for static HTML dumps. When the site is down and you are scrambling to bring it back, it's a good thing when your operations docs aren't also down.) Later Labs needed a management interface which got tucked onto Wikitech (this was one of those "do everything inside MediaWiki" eras), so it made sense to put all Labs-related documentation on wikitech as well. Most other things are on mediawiki.org. There were various proposals over the years to change that (move wikitech content to mediawiki.org, move all WMF stuff to wikitech, move all WMF stuff to meta, move all non-MediaWiki-documentation stuff to a new developer wiki etc.) but none of them gained much momentum. Due to being managed differently, wikitech is not a great work environment IMO. There is no unified login, no page translation support, no structured discussion support, no pageview metrics, the registration process is tied to creating LDAP and shell accounts... There are plans to improve this eventually [1], but between that and the audience differences, I'd stay away for now. Btw you are probably aware of the past discussion on a documentation SIG, but just in case: [2] [1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T123425 [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T156301 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] [AI] New ORES FAQ
Gergo, I thought Wikitech makes sense for a wikimedia-specific initiative. Now that you point it out, I'm all for going to mediawiki.org is everyone else is already there. Should be easy to move the landing page. -Aaron On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Gergo Tiszawrote: > Hi Sarah, > > thanks for working on this! > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Sarah R wrote: > >> Documentation like this is critical for our open software environment to >> work. I'm organizing a special interest group[4] to address >> documentation needs. If you have any questions or comments, please dont >> hesitate to reach out and share! >> [4] https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/SIGDOCS >> > > Is there any particular reason to do it on wikitech? Most of the other > SIGs [1] and most of our documentation is on mediawiki.org (which is in > general a better maintained place). The ORES docs live there too, apart > from a few pages that are concerned with operations issues. > > [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special_Interest_Groups > > ___ > AI mailing list > a...@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ai > > ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] [AI] New ORES FAQ
Rainbow colors! Here's a plain text one for those who can't read the fancy colors: Hi Everyone, I've been working together with Adam and Aaron from the Scoring Platform team to identiy technical documentation in need of improvement. This past quarter, the team and I worked together on a FAQ for ORES[1], which is now up and running. If you are interested in ORES, AI, or technical documentation in general, ORES documentation is a great place to contribute. We've got answers for most of the common questions, but we haven't finished 100% yet. You can help us by asking new questions on the discussion page for the FAQ[2]. I hope you can join us in editing BOLDly[3] by working on documentation that makes our projects more accessible and easier to understand. Documentation like this is critical for our open software environment to work. I'm organizing a special interest group[4] to address documentation needs. If you have any questions or comments, please dont hesitate to reach out and share! [1] https://mediawiki.org/wiki/ORES/FAQ [2] https://mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:ORES/FAQ [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle [4] https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/SIGDOCS With much Kindness, Sarah R. Rodlund Senior Project Coordinator-Product & Technology, Wikimedia Foundation srodl...@wikimedia.org ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] [AI] New ORES FAQ
Hi Sarah, thanks for working on this! On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Sarah Rwrote: > Documentation like this is critical for our open software environment to > work. I'm organizing a special interest group[4] to address > documentation needs. If you have any questions or comments, please dont > hesitate to reach out and share! > [4] https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/SIGDOCS > Is there any particular reason to do it on wikitech? Most of the other SIGs [1] and most of our documentation is on mediawiki.org (which is in general a better maintained place). The ORES docs live there too, apart from a few pages that are concerned with operations issues. [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special_Interest_Groups ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l