2015-09-04 20:55 GMT+02:00 Paul W. Frields <stickster@xxxxxxxxx>:
Opinion: Yes.On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 09:59:29AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Sep 2015 02:30:54 +0300
> Zacharias Mitzelos <mitzie@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > After my workshop at Flock about the Fedora Wiki, we discussed many
> > ways to improve and reorganize the wiki, and we sat down with Brian
> > Exelbierd and Peter Travis to discuss it more thoroughly and discuss
> > how the wiki should operate from now on and keep pages and content in
> > general, organized.
> >
> > So let me sum up the things that we wrote on the pad, and feel free to
> > visit it yourself here[1]:
>
> ...snip...
>
> So, a few things to note here:
>
> We are planning a upgrade to the wiki to the new LTS version. Any
> scripts/plugins we should make sure work with the new version, not the
> existing one. This upgrade will likely be after beta.
>
> It's probibly good to have this conversation on the devel and/or test
> lists too, as those groups use the wiki quite a lot too and possibly
> for things you haven't thought of. Here's some more off the top of my
> head:
>
> * Common bugs. Would this become a doc? How easy would it be to update
> (common bugs gets updated a ton in the run up to a release).
>
> * User pages. I think there was talk about moving this into hubs, but I
> don't know the status of it.
>
> * SOP's. I know releng has all their SOP's in the wiki, other groups
> likey too. Thats not end user facing really, so it would just
> stay?
> * Test days. This gets used a bunch for test days and qa results. Those
> stay?
Opinion: Yes.
> * Test cases. bodhi2 grabs test cases from the wiki for packages.
Opinion: Yes.
> * Ambassadors events. This is sort of end user facing as users are
> pointed there to know if Fedora is going to be at events, etc.
I could see this going to Hubs or something else.
> * Changes for releases. We have these as bugs, but also there's still
> wiki change pages.
We want this to be as zero-friction as possible for maintainers,
FESCo, etc. -- seems internally facing, and thus appropriate for wiki.
> That all said, I am in favor of more automated cleanup and marking
> things. We could also add more namespaces and have different policies
> for them, or even more wiki's if needed.
-1 more wikis but +1 namespaces! :-)
Quoting Paul's opinions 100%, specially events should go to the ambassadors team hub once we get it ready.
Speaking about Hubs:
At Flock we spoke also about having a sort of entry page where we put on groups, what they do etc, whatcanidoforfedora.org (asknow-ng) will help us with it. This could be the base for a new join.fedoraproject.org webpage, or even just fedoraproject.org. The actual status of the hubs project is "work in progress", but we have some mockups and a first test application (very small), anyway, hubs will not be ready before January 2016, and even in 4 months we will probably only have it partially deployed.
Finally I also see user pages fitting perfectly into hubs, as every user will have its personal space there. The goal of the user space is to manage all the stuff which actually is distributed on more apps in one place, therefore also the content which now we have in the wiki.
Robert Mayr
(robyduck)
(robyduck)
-- websites mailing list websites@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/websites
