incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Raphael Bircher <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Is it worth looking at Confluence Wiki Again?
Date Tue, 27 Sep 2011 22:19:59 GMT
Am 27.09.11 23:41, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Pedro F. Giffuni<>wrote:
>> --- On Tue, 9/27/11, Kay Schenk<>  wrote:
>> As Rob Weir has put it ...
>> ...
>>>> So obviously there is limited volunteer bandwidth to
>>>> migrate the wiki.
>>>> And I've heard from several people, on and off
>>>> the list, that much of what is on the wiki is
>>>> not very useful.
>>> uh, well...I don't know bout this. I was under the
>>> impression that MUCH of developer info was here.
>>>   Others would need to weigh in but I think it was
>>> widely used because of the ease of use.
>> Just my word of advice:
>> Check the MediaWiki at
>> If we take out information about Hg (dead),
>> the Development Teams and Projects (which will have to
>> be reorganized), Old News, the issue tracker ...
>> Is the information left worth it to run through a
>> MW-->CWiki conversion effort?
> Yes, the projects need some reorganization, but I doubt if all the
> development stuff should be removed. It simply hasn't gone anywhere -- yet.
> The problem is NOT the conversion effort (a one time deal) but the
> maintenance effort.
> *IF* someone(s) would step up to be the MW guru, there wouldn't be an issue
> but we're outside the "infra" workings.

Well the complicate part of our wiki is not the wiki itself, it's more 
the extensions. The problem is, that Ifrastructure allows only services 
with all security fixes. This is no problem for MW itself. MW is realy 
well maintained. But If you need a Update and you have only one 
extension who is not well maintained and does not work with the latest 
version of MW, the trubbles starts. Well, you can deinstall the 
extension, but then you lose also same functionality. And same of these 
functionality is the reason why we prefer MW.

The mediawiki desicion depends also to the question, "What we will doing 
with the wiki". If we will use it as a coordinations tool, and to 
hosting "internal" informations, not dedicated to endusers, then we 
don't realy need MW. If we want to use it for doc translation etc. Then 
there are functionality that no other (by apache infra) supports.
>> I think given the license situation we should just
>> leave that stuff as read-only for now and do all new
>> work on CWiki (or MoinMoin).
> Well OK, good enough and I would agree with this.
> After looking at the old wiki this am, it seems someone from the "es" area
> has made quite a few changes/additions, and the front page itself had been
> modified this am. Of course, there was that "throw pillows" page addition??!
> and ps. Does anyone here actually know HOW to put the old wiki in
> read-only???

I think, I can do this if needed.

Greetings Raphael

My private Homepage:

View raw message