On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:06:12PM +0200, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 09:46:56AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 05:47:31AM +0100, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > A related topic: At a future point in time, the libvirt Wiki could
> > > > probably be migrated to Git-based static-site generator project
> > > > Middleman? Most recently, two projects that I know of have made the
> > > > switch (RDO Project & oVirt).
> > >
> > > That seems to completely defeat the point of having a wiki. We already
> > > have a static website maintained in GIT and get essentially zero end
> > > user contributions to it. A wiki is intended to be quick & easy for
> > > people to just directly create content without having to learn any
> > > tools or process beyond their web browser
> >
> > Fair enough. Taking myself as an example, I have written/edited a few
> > libvirt wiki pages than touching in the in-tree docs. I anticipated
> > you'd say this (about having an easy way to quickly write a doc).
> >
>
> Apparently Github pull requests and editing in Markdown are the new thing,
> and people somehow find it usable.
> It also brings them somehow closer to development, having to enjoy the
> finesse of working with Git, etc...
Yeah, that's what I've heard so in other projects. At least, I see RDO
community folks seem to be happy with this approach.
> The main advantage is that their is review to the content being edited
> proactively.
I agree. In a Wiki, while it makes it easier to add new content, it's
also trivial to add misleading info with no proper review.
FWIW, for Mediawiki, I locally just write in Markdown, and convert it to
Mediawiki syntax via `pandoc`:
$ pandoc -f markdown -t Mediawiki foo.md -o foo.wiki
--
/kashyap
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list