Am 15.09.2016 um 03:57 schrieb Gregg Levine:
> Hello!
> Are also migrating off of Source Forge for everything else?
>
Yes, but that may take some time.
Kind regards
Jan
--
Hello!
Are also migrating off of Source Forge for everything else?
-
Gregg C Levine gregg.drw...@gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 14.09.2016 um 21:08 schrieb Johan Ström:
>>
>> [...]
>>
> I made a smal
Am 14.09.2016 um 21:08 schrieb Johan Ström:
>
> [...]
>
I made a small manpage to markdown converter script. Test manpage at
https://github.com/owfs/owfs-doc/wiki/DS18B20
I will test the script it a bit more, wrap it up, then upload the
manpages to the wiki automatically.
Kind regards
J
I added some things. I show up as Interface Innovations at the moment.
C
On 9/14/2016 12:08 PM, Johan Ström wrote:
> On 14/09/16 10:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>
>> Am 14.09.2016 um 07:21 schrieb Johan Ström:
>>> Colin, Jan, Colin, and everyone else: Besides the above, what do you
>>> guys think of
On 14/09/16 10:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 14.09.2016 um 07:21 schrieb Johan Ström:
>> Colin, Jan, Colin, and everyone else: Besides the above, what do you
>> guys think of the GitHub wiki? Would it be an acceptable way to go
>> forward? It certainly has a few downsides (mainly lack of structuri
As a pedestrian owfs user, I would like to support the proposal that it
should be made very clear very early that owserver is the way to go.
I used owfs directly for several months before slowly realizing this.
Not so unexpected perhaps, the system is after all called "owfs", and
"owserver" may so
Yes I would echo Nigel's comments. I don't think there is a perfect
solution but what is suggested sounds good to me.
Mick
On 14/09/16 10:14, Nigel Titley wrote:
>
> On 14/09/16 09:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>> Am 14.09.2016 um 07:21 schrieb Johan Ström:
>>> Colin, Jan, Colin, and everyone else:
On 14/09/16 09:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 14.09.2016 um 07:21 schrieb Johan Ström:
>> Colin, Jan, Colin, and everyone else: Besides the above, what do you
>> guys think of the GitHub wiki? Would it be an acceptable way to go
>> forward? It certainly has a few downsides (mainly lack of structur
As long as the word uncouth is used.
When it comes to family codes I have an orphaned page here that may be helpful.
I'll also be restructuring my site this week. Good timing.
https://www.interfaceinnovations.org/onewirefamilycodes.html
C
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:02 AM, Jan Kandziora wrote
Am 14.09.2016 um 07:21 schrieb Johan Ström:
>
> Colin, Jan, Colin, and everyone else: Besides the above, what do you
> guys think of the GitHub wiki? Would it be an acceptable way to go
> forward? It certainly has a few downsides (mainly lack of structuring,
> image uploads), but it's very easy to
I've found one more reason to have a separate owfs-doc repository: images.
Since the wiki itself has no (simple) means of hosting images, you have
to upload them somewhere else, for example the git repo.
Now, the downside is: you cannot have fully public repos.. You would
thus have to be given writ
OK the examples look OK, I don't know how to do it but if this is our
final solution I will invest the time to find out.
On 11/09/16 21:50, Johan Ström wrote:
> On 11/09/16 22:39, Mick Sulley wrote:
>
>> I just added a new page and it seems pretty easy to me to do that, but I
>> don't see any wa
On 11/09/16 22:39, Mick Sulley wrote:
> I just added a new page and it seems pretty easy to me to do that, but I
> don't see any way to create a page hierarchy, is that possible? I think
> we would need to group information to make it easily accessible.
>
> btw I think this discussion is a fantas
I just added a new page and it seems pretty easy to me to do that, but I
don't see any way to create a page hierarchy, is that possible? I think
we would need to group information to make it easily accessible.
btw I think this discussion is a fantastic move in the right direction,
currently we
On 09/11/2016 06:18 PM, Johan Ström wrote:
> On 10/09/16 14:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>> Am 10.09.2016 um 11:22 schrieb Colin Law:
>>> Is there really a need for two? Why
>>> not just have everything in one?
>>>
>> Because of access rights. GitHub only allows full developer access to
>> anything
In this case, owfs and owfs-wiki repos seem to make sense. Would be nice if
there were a blacklist feature.
> On Sep 11, 2016, at 10:06 AM, Johan Ström wrote:
>
>> On 11/09/16 18:55, Colin Reese wrote:
>> I see. I didn't see there was a restricted access list option for the public
>> wiki.
>
On 11/09/16 18:55, Colin Reese wrote:
> I see. I didn't see there was a restricted access list option for the public
> wiki.
Just to be clear:
Each repository can have it's own wiki.
A wiki can either be publicly editable ("any github user"), or only
editable by repository collaborators ("users
I see. I didn't see there was a restricted access list option for the public
wiki.
> On Sep 11, 2016, at 9:46 AM, Johan Ström wrote:
>
> If we opt for an "any user" wiki it can be attached to the main repo, yes.
>
> The only(?) reason for detaching it would be have a
> non-publicy-editable,
If we opt for an "any user" wiki it can be attached to the main repo, yes.
The only(?) reason for detaching it would be have a
non-publicy-editable, but with a different access list than the main repo.
On 11/09/16 18:39, Colin Reese wrote:
> Why can't there be an 'any user' wiki attached to the
Why can't there be an 'any user' wiki attached to the real repo? What has
detaching the wiki solved?
> On Sep 11, 2016, at 9:18 AM, Johan Ström wrote:
>
>> On 10/09/16 14:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>>> Am 10.09.2016 um 11:22 schrieb Colin Law:
>>> Is there really a need for two? Why
>>> not just
On 10/09/16 14:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 10.09.2016 um 11:22 schrieb Colin Law:
>> Is there really a need for two? Why
>> not just have everything in one?
>>
> Because of access rights. GitHub only allows full developer access to
> anything or no rights at all. Not Wiki-alone.
>
> We could set
On 10/09/16 14:54, Colin Law wrote:
> On 10 September 2016 at 11:52, Johan Ström wrote:
>> On 10/09/16 12:13, Colin Law wrote:
>>> On 10 September 2016 at 10:21, Johan Ström wrote:
...
I suggest the following:
a) For public site, use Github Pages with Jekyll.
We (the de
On 10/09/16 14:23, Colin Law wrote:
> On 10 September 2016 at 13:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>> Am 10.09.2016 um 11:22 schrieb Colin Law:
>>> Is there really a need for two? Why
>>> not just have everything in one?
>>>
>> Because of access rights. GitHub only allows full developer access to
>> anyth
I think a distinctly themed user wiki is probably a good idea. A bunch of the
content there will be useful, but not appropriate for docs. Also, other Colin,
I can't think of a better way to merge content, e.g. what info I have on the Pi
with whatever you're writing, than a wysiwyg editor.
C
>
On 10 September 2016 at 11:52, Johan Ström wrote:
> On 10/09/16 12:13, Colin Law wrote:
>> On 10 September 2016 at 10:21, Johan Ström wrote:
>>> ...
>>> I suggest the following:
>>>
>>> a) For public site, use Github Pages with Jekyll.
>>> We (the developer community) would use git to push files
On 10 September 2016 at 13:02, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 10.09.2016 um 11:22 schrieb Colin Law:
>> Is there really a need for two? Why
>> not just have everything in one?
>>
> Because of access rights. GitHub only allows full developer access to
> anything or no rights at all. Not Wiki-alone.
I
Am 10.09.2016 um 11:21 schrieb Johan Ström:
>
> Groff can (or so says google) write HTML files from manpages, so
> shouldn't be an issue to automate.
>
The Groff HTML output is not pretty and it gets mangled again by the
wiki importer. We have to check if it is all nice after this. Especially
the
Am 10.09.2016 um 11:22 schrieb Colin Law:
> Is there really a need for two? Why
> not just have everything in one?
>
Because of access rights. GitHub only allows full developer access to
anything or no rights at all. Not Wiki-alone.
We could settle on having an owfs-doc project with a open wiki
On 10/09/16 12:13, Colin Law wrote:
> On 10 September 2016 at 10:21, Johan Ström wrote:
>> ...
>> I suggest the following:
>>
>> a) For public site, use Github Pages with Jekyll.
>> We (the developer community) would use git to push files which are
>> rendered & published automatically by github o
On 10 September 2016 at 10:21, Johan Ström wrote:
> ...
> I suggest the following:
>
> a) For public site, use Github Pages with Jekyll.
> We (the developer community) would use git to push files which are
> rendered & published automatically by github on push.
> If someone is more confortable wit
On 10/09/16 11:21, Johan Ström wrote:
>
> On 10/09/16 02:00, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>
Just as a demo on how Jekyll works:
The files pushed to: https://github.com/owfs/owfs.github.io
Renders into this: https://owfs.github.io/
So for example, the src of the introduction page looks like this:
On 10 September 2016 at 01:00, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 08.09.2016 um 22:32 schrieb Johan Ström:
>>
>> .. what else?
>>
> First: I'd love to get rid of are these personal blogs who give stray
> information bites which are quickly outdated and totally out of control.
> This is the source of most m
On 10/09/16 02:00, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 08.09.2016 um 22:32 schrieb Johan Ström:
>> .. what else?
>>
> First: I'd love to get rid of are these personal blogs who give stray
> information bites which are quickly outdated and totally out of control.
> This is the source of most misfortune for
Well, I have to say that the site looks outdated and is difficult to navigate.
It does not make it easy to get information that appears useful or
authoritative. When I was new to owfs, I could not find even the basic
information I needed to explain how owfs and owserver interact. The best
infor
Am 10.09.2016 um 02:00 schrieb Jan Kandziora:
>
> This should be seperated from "official" documentation but in a way the
> difference is only sublime.
>
subliminal of course.
Kind regards
Jan
--
__
Am 08.09.2016 um 22:32 schrieb Johan Ström:
>
> .. what else?
>
First: I'd love to get rid of are these personal blogs who give stray
information bites which are quickly outdated and totally out of control.
This is the source of most misfortune for owfs users. I'm pretty sure
only 1 of 10 shows up
First of, I agree that writing all content in HTML, even if ever so
basic HTML, is tedious when I just want to write text. Having to write
italic instead of just *italic* does become quite tiresome in the
long run..
Also, I don't want to be forced to click buttons to make my text bold,
or to w
Am 08.09.2016 um 11:52 schrieb Colin Law:
>>
>> Face it, simple markup alone will not give you any contributors. Hell,
>> non-developer documentation contributors don't want to bother with
>> markup at all!
>
> Wikipedia doesn't seem to have problems getting contributors.
>
Oh, COME ON. At Wikipe
> On Sep 8, 2016, at 2:53 AM, Stefano Miccoli wrote:
>
>
>> On 08 Sep 2016, at 10:20, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>>
>> Face it, simple markup alone will not give you any contributors. Hell,
>> non-developer documentation contributors don't want to bother with
>> markup at all!
>>
>> What we need
> On 08 Sep 2016, at 10:20, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>
> Face it, simple markup alone will not give you any contributors. Hell,
> non-developer documentation contributors don't want to bother with
> markup at all!
>
> What we need is an interface that makes it easy for *anyone* to
> contribute to t
On 8 September 2016 at 09:20, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> Am 08.09.2016 um 09:58 schrieb Colin Law:
>> On 7 September 2016 at 23:03, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>>> ...
>>> In reality, we don't need this "simple" markup when all the people who
>>> are contributing to the documentation are developers.
>>
>> N
Am 08.09.2016 um 09:58 schrieb Colin Law:
> On 7 September 2016 at 23:03, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>> ...
>> In reality, we don't need this "simple" markup when all the people who
>> are contributing to the documentation are developers.
>
> Not necessarily true. I have recently been guided on this li
On 7 September 2016 at 23:03, Jan Kandziora wrote:
> ...
> In reality, we don't need this "simple" markup when all the people who
> are contributing to the documentation are developers.
Not necessarily true. I have recently been guided on this list as to
how to interface 1-wire devices to a Raspb
Am 08.09.2016 um 08:44 schrieb Matthias Urlichs:
> On 08.09.2016 08:29, Johan Ström wrote:
>> Regardless of which one we find most
>> suiting, I'd say we should keep all info in *one* place
> Personally I'd rather use Sphinx or similar. The main reason is that
> it's reasonably easy to sustain a co
Here is an example of pages made using Sphinx:
https://pgm.readthedocs.io/en/develop/
C
> On Sep 7, 2016, at 11:29 PM, Johan Ström wrote:
>
>> On 08/09/16 00:13, Colin Reese wrote:
>> What are the cons for a github-hosted wiki again?
> Well, my only objection would be that it is a third party,
On 08.09.2016 08:29, Johan Ström wrote:
> Regardless of which one we find most
> suiting, I'd say we should keep all info in *one* place
Personally I'd rather use Sphinx or similar. The main reason is that
it's reasonably easy to sustain a coherent narrative structure, i.e. one
could convert the wh
On 08/09/16 00:13, Colin Reese wrote:
> What are the cons for a github-hosted wiki again?
Well, my only objection would be that it is a third party, but since
"we" don't really have a proper organization or funding or anything like
that which would naturally be able to "run it ourselfs", every solu
What are the cons for a github-hosted wiki again?
It really seems to make sense to have all of the source and the how-to
hosted in one place, in an easy to use and modify format. Admin and
source control is easy to use (it is designed for it, after all),
managed, and attached to the repo for ow
Am 07.09.2016 um 21:23 schrieb Johan Ström:
>
> Pro:
> - would be able to properly version it in git
> - Could integrate with automatic build on push, using pull requests for
> contribution etc.
> - static is simple
> Cons:
> - Depending on how it's implemented, it could be trickier to contribute
Github + wiki. I can help. I have content (all devices list, easy
explanation of owserver/owfs relationship, etc.) that I will gladly
contribute.
Colin
On 9/7/2016 12:23 PM, Johan Ström wrote:
> On 07/09/16 10:48, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>> Am 07.09.2016 um 07:15 schrieb Johan Ström:
>>> How did
50 matches
Mail list logo
