Would this do as the task;
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WAVE-290


On 29 August 2011 15:50, Paul Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Epic? WAIB goes under there.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Thomas Wrobel <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Mon, 29 August, 2011 14:30:16
> Subject: Re: Update Wiki for Apache Wave
>
> Sure...should I categorise this as just a "TASK" or maybe a
> "STORY".....kinda new to all this so not sure what category this issue
> would fall under. (I dread to think what gets put under "EPIC" !)
>
> -Thomas
>
> ~~~~~~
> Reviews of anything, by anyone;
> www.rateoholic.co.uk
> Please try out my new site and give feedback :)
>
>
>
> On 29 August 2011 14:44, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks for picking this up Thomas. You can open an issue in the Wave JIRA
>> for this and assign it to yourself.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Thomas Wrobel <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Seeing as I didn't have much luck picking apart the code, I could have
>>> a go at this. At least to put more details in then there is now.
>>>
>>> Probably need checking over after I'm done for accuracy/missing
>>> information. (and spelling...)
>>>
>>> Shall I sign up for the task?
>>>
>>> -Thomas Wrobel
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~
>>> Reviews of anything, by anyone;
>>> www.rateoholic.co.uk
>>> Please try out my new site and give feedback :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 August 2011 14:09, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > I think a good first step for creation Apache Wave Wiki page would be
>>> fill
>>> > in the "History" part of the "About Apache Wave" page at
>>> > http://incubator.apache.org/wave/about.html.
>>> >
>>> > Currently the "History" contains the following TODO: "Lets summarize
>>> Google
>>> > Wave, Fed One, Wave in a Box, Apache Wave, the protocol, etc. It will be
>>> > interesting to keep this information for people to understand how the
>>> > project has evolved."
>>> >
>>> > Would be great of someone would take on the task to address this TODO.
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Great! Thanks for taking on this!
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2011/8/10 Jérémy Naegel <[email protected]>
>>> >>
>>> >>> Suggestion made here :
>>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Apache_Wave#Apache_Wave
>>> >>>
>>> >>> - Jeremy
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Jérémy Naegel <[email protected]>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> > What I'm not familiar with is the Wikipedia revision / revocation of
>>> >>> > changes policy...
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > I'll try to suggest that change inside the discussion page and see if
>>> it
>>> >>> > triggers any reaction.
>>> >>> > After a few days without reactions or with positive reactions, I
>>> guess
>>> >>> it
>>> >>> > would be OK to change back the title.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Then it will be possible to create a new "Apache Wave" entry (as it
>>> >>> won't
>>> >>> > be a duplicate).
>>> >>> > I could start it, with the Apache Wave website definition and some
>>> >>> general
>>> >>> > infos, but I won't be able to add technical details.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Btw, If someone whose mother tongue is English wants to help, that
>>> would
>>> >>> be
>>> >>> > much appreciated!
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > - Jeremy
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >> I see. So I guess that's what should be done. The entry should be
>>> >>> renamed
>>> >>> >> back to Google Wave and a new entry for Apache Wave (and Wave in a
>>> Box)
>>> >>> >> should be created.
>>> >>> >> I am not that familiar with the standards for creating Wiki entries,
>>> >>> also,
>>> >>> >>  I personally would prefer to spend my spare time on actually
>>> creating
>>> >>> >> patches for WIAB. So I thought that maybe some non technical
>>> community
>>> >>> >> member would like to take on this (actually very important) task.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> 2011/8/10 Jérémy Naegel <[email protected]>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> > About this Apache Wave Wikipedia page : It was, up until a couple
>>> of
>>> >>> >> > months,
>>> >>> >> > the Google Wave page and it has simply been renamed Apache Wave. I
>>> >>> think
>>> >>> >> it
>>> >>> >> > was a bad move, this page should have stayed the Google Wave page
>>> >>> since
>>> >>> >> > Google Wave is still an existing service, and a new Apache Wave
>>> page
>>> >>> >> should
>>> >>> >> > have been created from scratch since it's a fresh start for the
>>> >>> product.
>>> >>> >> I
>>> >>> >> > think the renaming edit of the page should simply be undone, but I
>>> >>> guess
>>> >>> >> > this will trigger a debate among the contributors.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > - Jeremy
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Dan Peterson <
>>> [email protected]
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >> > wrote:
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > > Agreed -- go for it!
>>> >>> >> > >
>>> >>> >> > >
>>> >>> >> > > ----- Original Message -----
>>> >>> >> > > From: Upayavira [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> >>> >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 04:33 AM
>>> >>> >> > > To: [email protected] <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> >>> >> > > Subject: Re: Update Wiki for Apache Wave
>>> >>> >> > >
>>> >>> >> > > I'd say just do it. If anyone wants to help, they will have an
>>> >>> 'edit'
>>> >>> >> > > button too.
>>> >>> >> > >
>>> >>> >> > > Upayavira
>>> >>> >> > >
>>> >>> >> > > On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:25 +0300, "Yuri Z" <[email protected]>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> > > > I stumbled upon the Wiki page for Apache
>>> >>> >> > > > Wave<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Wave>- and my
>>> >>> impression
>>> >>> >> was
>>> >>> >> > > > that it's of very low quality and conveys very
>>> >>> >> > > > little information about Apache Wave and Wave in a Box
>>> project.
>>> >>> Most
>>> >>> >> of
>>> >>> >> > > > the
>>> >>> >> > > > information is related to Google Wave. I  thought that it
>>> could
>>> >>> be
>>> >>> >> nice
>>> >>> >> > > > to
>>> >>> >> > > > discuss how we can improve /restructure the Wiki entry for
>>> Apache
>>> >>> >> Wave.
>>> >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> >> > >
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to