incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: Wiki for the project
Date Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:28:25 GMT
On 14/06/2011 23:08, Rob Weir wrote:
> Note the requirements here under "Using a wiki to Create Documentation".  It
> looks like we need to restrict write access to that wiki to those who have
> returned iCLA's to Apache.

This is correct if you intend for the wiki content to be made available 
via your project website or distributed as part of a release. I don't 
think this is necessary if you have a wiki in the or and have no intention of exporting this content (other 
mentors will correct me if I'm wrong).

> I wonder if this becomes easier if we segregate the documentation onto its
> own wiki?

We have an SVN backed CMS system which is ideal for building project 
websites. As Joe said elsewhere this is a home-grown, markdown based 
system. It has the advantage of providing both a web based and SVN based 
editing environment (although to be honest the web based interface is 
usable but clunky - don't tell Joe though he wrote it for us - 
volunteers welcome)

For documentation that you intend to distribute this is probably the 
best system as you don't have to maintain separate access rights and 
people can work offline with the sources. It also means that your 
documentation writers are treated as first class citizens on ASF 

The downside is that your documentation writers will need to be able to 
use SVN and some simple python scripts to work efficiently (the web 
interface is fine for quick edits).

The CMS doesn't seem to be mentioned on the page you link to above. For 
more info see


> -Rob
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Dave Fisher<>  wrote:
>>>> If we want to have different groups of users with update rights we
>>>> should definitely have two wikis.
>>>> See for the instructions regarding
>>>> confluence.
>>>> We could start with the following confluence wiki spaces:
>>>> (1) ooo-dev - for developer facing documentation.
>>>> (2) ooo-user - for a prospective user wiki. We can debate whether
>>>> confluence, MediaWiki, moinmoin or ? are best by experimenting with
>>>> various approaches.
>>> I don't understand, you just said you would start to create a
>>> Confluence ooo-user space to debate whether to use a different
>>> engine?
>>> There is probably overlap between (1) and (2) so it needs to
>>> be clearly defined what goes where. With (1) you are probably
>>> referring to core development (coding OOo), but there is also
>>> extension development (using UNO to develop extra functionality)
>>> or office automation that probably are better placed in (2) (for
>>> the developer-user).
>> For (1) you understand me correctly. This is the space we need now to start
>> doing all the planning and development blueprints.
>> For (2) I mean a possible way to handle the package user and/or developer
>> user documentation that will be migrated from the wiki at
>> BTW - It should not be hard to move content between two confluence spaces
>> if it is put in the wrong location.
>>> If we plan to reuse existing wiki content for docs, it would be
>>> easiest to continue to use MediaWiki (if this is an option)
>>> since this is where all content currently is. A lot of the
>>> content in the docs section uses MW features like
>>> subpages, auto page lists, templates/transclusions etc that
>>> may be cumbersome to migrate.
>> To use MediaWiki someone will need to contribute at infrastructure-dev.
>> Otherwise it is moinmoin or confluence. I don't care so much, but confluence
>> is well supported here at Apache so it is an easy choice.
>> For (3) the options are greater and we can change.
>> I know we need (1) and it is not much harder to do (2) and (3)
>> prospectively and let the rest of the PPMC decide.
>> Here is the jira issue:  (INFRA-3684) Create 3 CWiki Spaces for OpenOffice
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>> Frank

View raw message