Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 20:31:27
Message-Id: 20180703203117.GA22367@linux1.home
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki by "M. J. Everitt"
1 On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:09:16PM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote:
2 > On 03/07/18 21:01, William Hubbs wrote:
3 > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote:
4 > >>> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
5 > >>> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend?
6 > >> I think the wiki is very useful and should remain.
7 > > Like I said, there are wiki packages out there like gollum, ikiwiki, and
8 > > probably others which would allow editing of content via text files and
9 > > use vcs's for version control of the changes, so I'm not advocating for
10 > > shutting down the wiki. I think we should have one that is more
11 > > accessible to users who want to use different interfaces. We shouldn't
12 > > be forcing users to use a full web browser just to contribute to the
13 > > wiki.
14 > >
15 > >>> It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
16 > >>> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
17 > >> I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the
18 > >> wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the
19 > >> existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure
20 > >> user accounts.
21 > > If that is converted from markdown, all you would have to do is use the
22 > > markdown directly if the new wiki supports it.
23 > >
24 > >> Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long
25 > >> footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."?
26 > > I have no idea about that, but that alone shouldn't stop this from
27 > > happening.
28 > >
29 > >> For the special case of the Gentoo Manual:
30 > >> I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository,
31 > >> because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better
32 > >> to make PRs for the manual.
33 > > I don't really see the manual as a special case. We should use the same
34 > > interface for everything.
35 > >
36 > > William
37 > 1) I think this idea was floated before, and failed before ..
38
39 That's not a reason for not floating it again.
40
41 > 2) Existing wiki team are badly understaffed, how would this improve
42 > things? How would new maintainers be registered and managed?
43
44 It improves things by offering more flexable ways for users to edit the
45 wiki. if you want to use a browser you can, or you can use something
46 like git and edit the content that way.
47
48 I don't know for sure how maintainers would be registered and managed,
49 but I don't know that on mw either.
50
51 > 3) Are you volunteering to implement this change yourself (infra are
52 > equally understaffed) and manage the change and transition, in addition
53 > to your existing commitments?
54
55 I'm not on the infra team, so I would have to be added there to be able
56 to do it I guess, but I would be willing to assist if I could.
57
58 William

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature