incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexandro Colorado <...@openoffice.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Is it worth looking at Confluence Wiki Again?
Date Wed, 28 Sep 2011 06:01:28 GMT
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Alexandro Colorado <jza@openoffice.org>wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Pedro F. Giffuni <giffunip@tutopia.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Tue, 9/27/11, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> 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 http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/
>> >
>> > 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 then we should look for that guru. So far I havent event seen clearly
> what things do we actually need. Maybe we need to come to the decision we
> need to get a MW administrator. Clayton was our administrator, if he want to
> train the new administrator then we wont need such a guru. AFAIK he left
> open the option of doing some light mentoring on the administration.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> > 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???
>>
>
> Usually to do a backup of the wiki, you are supposed to make it read only.
> Is a configuration line in the .conf file.
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Backing_up_a_wiki
>

I paste the wrong link, is actually:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgReadOnly



>
>
>
>>
>>
>> > Pedro.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> MzK
>>
>> "There is no such thing as coincidence."
>>           -- Leroy Jethro Gibbs, Rule #39
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Alexandro Colorado*
> *OpenOffice.org* Español
> http://es.openoffice.org
> fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
>
>


-- 
*Alexandro Colorado*
*OpenOffice.org* Español
http://es.openoffice.org
fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message