Return-Path: 
 <ooo-dev-return-3088-apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 70DE871D6
	for <apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org>;
 Fri,  5 Aug 2011 10:18:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 29444 invoked by uid 500); 5 Aug 2011 10:18:03 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 29147 invoked by uid 500); 5 Aug 2011 10:17:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ooo-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <ooo-dev.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 29135 invoked by uid 99); 5 Aug 2011 10:17:40 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 10:17:40 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0
	tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [94.136.40.61] (HELO mailex.mailcore.me) (94.136.40.61)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 10:17:32 +0000
Received: from host86-129-247-134.range86-129.btcentralplus.com
 ([86.129.247.134] helo=[192.168.1.69])
	by mail10.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Terry@ellisons.org.uk>)
	id 1QpHSp-0007I0-0n
	for ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:17:11 +0100
Message-ID: <4E3BC326.2030408@ellisons.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:17:10 +0100
From: Terry Ellison <Terry@ellisons.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Access to wiki
References: <1312425171.2180.12.camel@jean-laptop15>
	 <CAP-ksogjKb2WF5T6PMSsOo23RRjHTYaVvdPPjEaJ7FQObmO1rQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1312528485.2157.58.camel@jean-laptop15>
In-Reply-To: <1312528485.2157.58.camel@jean-laptop15>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------050806010201020808070109"
X-Mailcore-Auth: 8445677
X-Mailcore-Domain: 884398

--------------050806010201020808070109
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<snip>
> I thought the idea was to have two wikis, one for (among other things)
> "official documentation" that requires contributors to sign the iCLA,
> and the other for "community documentation" that does not. It would seem
> to me that the items you described fit into the "official docs", while
> much (I suspect the majority) of the existing OOo wiki contents fits
> more into "community docs", with the few "official" docs on the existing
> wiki either under the Oracle brand and appropriate license or
> essentially obsolete (for example, the wiki version of the user guides,
> which only go up to v3.2).
>
> If this is the case, then it seems to me there is no real problem.
> Simply apply different rules to the two wikis. What am I missing?
>
> --Jean
>
>
A good example to my mind is the separation @ Ubuntu between

    * https://help.ubuntu.com/ -- which is the "official" website, and
      the sub-site
    * https://help.ubuntu.com/community -- which carries the headline
      "Community Documentation"


--------------050806010201020808070109--