geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Sisson <jrsis...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Using Confluence
Date Fri, 09 Dec 2005 08:19:41 GMT
I have spent much time reviewing the  "Clear statement about confluence" 
discussion on the infra list.  My general impression is that infra said 
No (at least until some issues are resolved).  I have mentioned this in 
an earlier email but got no response.

I also got the impression from the infra list that in the past others 
have offered to support software that has been installed and then didn't 
live up to their promise leaving the problem with the overburdened infra 
people, which hasn't helped our cause.

A lot of the issues infra raised sounded valid to me.  I don't think we 
are helping the relationship with the infra people by just ignoring 
their concerns and doing our own thing in a zone.  The primary purpose 
of zones are for projects that need to run their project's own software 
(e.g. Tomcat in a Tomcat zone).  It was noted that mission critical 
services should not be run in the zone.  I would consider the wiki to be 
mission critical to the project and its users.

As much as I like Confluence, I don't think it is wise to rely upon 
until we can get buy-in of the infra people.  This may take some time 
while until some of the issues raised by infra are addressed.  We can't 
afford to have it taken away from us down the road after investing a lot 
of time into it.

Has much thought been given to what the new incubator projects that were 
previously using Confluence are going to do?

The following are some of the issues that the infra people had that need 
to be addressed/debated over time:

- How many projects and developers want it?
- Who is going join the infra people to help support it (but not install 
it).  Hardware is not the issue
- Need stability/performance issues resolved  (get it working with front 
end cache, handle spidering etc.)
- How easy to import from MoinMoin?  They don't want to run two Wikis.
- How easy to export when we move to the next Wiki?
- Does it support SVN as a store?
- Does it support farms?
- How well does it support the mandatory oversight requirements?

PROPOSAL:
Focus our energy on getting good content in our existing wiki whilst the 
Confluence issue is resolved in parallel (this may take a number of 
Geronimo releases...).  Once the move to confluence is given the go 
ahead we can then "plan" the migration from the existing wiki.

There are other ways to do documentation that can be exported to both 
PDF and HTML.  These other methods also allow documentaton (the manuals) 
to be edited off-line and stored in svn.

John

Jason Dillon wrote:

> Hiya, I think we need to decide if we are going to keep using  
> Confluence or not.  And if we are which instance we are going to use,  
> and then shutdown the other.
>
> I've already imported the GERONIMO space that Atlassian is hosting  
> twice, and already more changes have gone into that instance, so I  
> will need to reimport again.  Not a huge problem, but its not really  
> trivial.
>
> I believe that Confluence is a great tool, and is a huge bonus for  
> our community to create and manage a rich set of documentation.  So  
> obviously I'm down to use it.
>
> So, what I'd like to know is if we should use the instance on our  
> zone, and shutdown the other instance?
>
> --jason
>


Mime
View raw message