[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: centos-docs
Subject: Re: [CentOS-docs] wiki.centos.org .. what's next ?
From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists () hughesjr ! com>
Date: 2017-12-12 17:43:19
Message-ID: 31b52a95-e95f-9dff-34a2-f70813b77f5c () hughesjr ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]
[Attachment #4 (multipart/mixed)]
On 12/12/2017 10:29 AM, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> On 12/12/17 17:25, Akemi Yagi wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Fabian Arrotin <arrfab@centos.org
>> <mailto:arrfab@centos.org>> wrote:
>>
>> it's all in the title : what's next for wiki.centos.org
>> <http://wiki.centos.org> ?
>>
>> As a reminder, current wiki.centos.org <http://wiki.centos.org>
>> instance is powered by moinmoin
>> (https://moinmo.in/) but quite an old version (moin-1.5.8-3.el6.noarch)
>>
>> Recently I had a quick look at trying to update/upgrade that version to
>> something newer/supported, but it's a nightmare : the data conversion
>> just kill the target server (oom) and no way to know why. When trying to
>> get help from moin people in their irc server, I was answered that such
>> old version wasn't supported, and that those upgrade scripts themselves
>> aren't supported either, so nobody would help finding why they'd be
>> buggy without having access to the full data.
>>
>> Of course exposing the whole wiki instance (including user/pass) isn't
>> an option, so except if somebody has really a clue about what can go
>> wrong with the update script from 1.5 to 1.6 (and then it has to be done
>> for each major.minor upgrade, so all that in a chained operation), the
>> migration will be impossible.
>>
>> That's why I'd like to discuss a possibility to move wiki to something
>> else, and that's even why we should discuss the need for a wiki itself.
>>
>> If we want to continue to have community written/maintained content,
>> should be still use a wiki or something else ? Moin was selected ~10y
>> ago for its simplicity and online editing, but in 2017, most people (dev
>> and ops) are probably using other workflows, like git/pull-requests/etc.
>>
>> So what about exploring other possibilities ?
>>
>> I don't have a real proposal (even if mkdocs.org <http://mkdocs.org>
>> , simple solution with
>> Markdown, combined with git would be perfect for me) but just wanted to
>> start a dedicated thread so that we can think about the future of
>> wiki.centos.org <http://wiki.centos.org>
>>
>> Opinions ? Proposals ? anything else ? Fee free to comment :-)
>>
>>
>> I personally would like to see an update to the current wiki. However
>> if this is not plausible, maybe an alternative like mediawiki can be
>> considered?
>>
>> One note I want to make is that use of git may not be suitable/best for
>> docs and certainly will be frowned upon by some notable contributors to
>> the current wiki.
>>
>> Akemi
>>
>
> *ack*
>
> So maybe we should try to reach out the moinmoin people to see if they'd
> like to see us continuing using moin or switch to something else.
>
> Mediawiki can be investigated, as that's also Fedora switched to in the
> past.
> So we already know that :
> - openid auth works (against FAS, so that will work with ACO)
> - they probably had some migration scripts somewhere that we can test if
> needed)
I don't really have any preferences .. other than, not github, unless it
is the ONLY thing that would work. I have an issue using non open
source solution unless it is a last resort,
["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]
_______________________________________________
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic