[rkward-devel] RKWard Wiki
thomas.friedrichsmeier at ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Fri May 1 10:59:45 UTC 2009
On Friday 01 May 2009, Prasenjit Kapat wrote:
> This raises the old issue: fragmented online documentation! So, let me
> try to understand a few things here:
true, true. I was a bit too focussed on fixing the most obvious mess with as
little effort as possible. Thanks for bringing in the larger picture.
> 1. The :WIKI: tab on rkward.sf.net will eventually become defunct and
> be linked to the new mediawiki site?
My short-term plan was to simply make that link point to the new wiki.
> 2. The :USER: and :DEVELOPMENT: tabs remain on rkward.sf.net?
> Old issue again:
> How should the documentation be segmented? What goes in mediawiki and
> what in rkward.sf.net? Should the :USER: and :DEVELOPMENT: pages be
> updated as-and-when-deemed-fit by accepting the "important" notes from
Ok, let's take a closer looks at that.
A bit of history, first: When Yves Jacolin created the current pages in 2005,
he (or somebody else) suggested to place more of the content inside the wiki,
and less inside his custom framework that is used for the :USER:
and :DEVELOPMENT: tabs. At that time I did not like the idea, as I was
concerned about vandalism in the wiki.
Since that time, we've had to abandon the idea of fully anonymous editing in
the wiki, anyway. And with editing tied to sourceforge accounts (with
verified E-mail addresses, among other things), we should be relatively safe
from the most annoying forms of spam/vandalism. Therefore, one obvious idea
would be to make the wiki play a more prominent role.
Let's take a look at the current content:
-- :USER: --
- Frontpage / News announcements -
The most important page, and probably does not work too well in a wiki (or
does it? Feel free to discuss / point to good examples). Of course the
current framework is broken as well (by changes in restrictions on the
web-server), e.g. you can no longer access the older news items. So while at
it, it may be worth considering a new solution, here, as well.
- Overview -
Very important, but very out of date. I guess this should go in the wiki. (But
keep the link on the front page)
- Screenshots -
Important, but once again the current solution is broken, too. Would
screenshots work / be managable in the wiki?
- Download / Forum / Mailing List -
Those are just links. It's important to have those links on the front page,
but that is easy in any technical solution.
- Documentation -
Basically this is just a (terribly short) collection of links, as well. Should
be moved to the wiki. (But keep the link on the front page)
- FAQ -
Should definitely be moved to the wiki. (But keep the link on the front page)
-- :DEVELOPMENT: --
- News -
I guess the world would not come to an end, if this page is removed. If it can
be moved to a different technical solution, easily, there's no harm in that,
but I think this page is not mandatory.
- Status -
Should be moved to the wiki.
- Documentation -
Once again, just a collection of links. Some of the documentation items in
here should not be kept in the wiki (the primary source of the "Writing
plugins" documentation is .docbook, and I think it should be kept that way;
the API-documentation is generated from the sources). But of course the
collection of links can be moved without problems.
- Open tasks -
Important, partially out-of-date, definitely something for the wiki.
- Getting involved -
Could be moved to some central place in the wiki.
- Bugs / RFE / Patches / Subversion -
Those are just links.
-- Conclusion (so far): --
- The entire :DEVELOPMENT:-section could and should be moved to the wiki.
Ideas on what to do with :DEVELOPMENT:-News would be nice.
- Much of the :USER:-section could be placed in the wiki as well, but for
front page and possibly for screenshots we probably need a separate solution.
-- Further points to consider: --
- Yves' website framework was written with translations in mind. In pratice,
very few items have been translated at all, but in theory a good i18n
solution for the website would be nice.
- The structure of the wiki could certainly be improved as well. Even more so,
if we do make the large change and move much of the old pages into the wiki.
I don't really have much time to work on this, but - hey - it's a wiki. Why
don't you go ahead and simply put up a suggestion for a structure/main page?
Now really is a good opportunity to give the wiki a radical overhaul. (And I
guess it's ok to start editing the new wiki, now. I don't think a completely
new import will be needed any longer, so go ahead).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the Rkward-devel