I hope no one thought that I meant that only PMC members can change Wiki content. My proposal still involves the public being able to change Wiki, just centralizing the oversight.
-------- Tim O'Brien > -----Original Message----- > From: O'brien, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 6:01 PM > To: community@apache.org > Subject: Wiki - we've got a proposed solution - hierarchy > > > -- related to community > > Community@ archives are available on Eyebrowse, and for > someone not involved in those debates they record a several > pretty important discussions. I won't mention any names, but > I think it is time to prove that this list is "more than a > big filibuster". Maybe in the process we can bring some > people back to the community@ list through action not words. > Please come back. > > Why would anyone ever think that a discussion of ASF policy > on Instant Messaging is something not to make visible? > Eyebrowse archives solve these problems -- I only hope that > lists not currently archived aren't keeping good discourse > secret. ( ACTUALLY, now that I think about it, the Instant > Messaging policy discussion is an example of "highly ironic > secrecy" . Take a read, and think about that: > http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=community@ > apache.org&msg > No=1104 ) > > -- a SOLUTION for WIKI > > NOTE: I feel terrible about making this proposal, as I wasn't > involved in setting Wiki up, and if the proposal is accepted, > it will mean real work for "somebody else". It might be > possible for me to soon rejoin infrastructure and volunteer > to lend a hand, but we'll see about that. > > Oversight of content relating to a specific PMC should be the > repsonsibility of said PMC. It is clear that PMCs like > Jakarta and James want a Wiki. It is not clear that PMCs > like HTTP Server or Web Service have any Wiki content as of > yet. ( DISCLAIMER: I don't speak for any PMCs, I am not a > member of any PMC. I am observing the page HomePage. ) Say, > that PMCs are made responsible for policing content, this > would require someone from the HTTP PMC to become a > RecentChanges watcher EVEN THOUGH her PMC has zero content on > the ApacheWiki. > > Therefore, I propose a hierarchy of Wikis. Every Wiki has a > set of dedicated WikiAdmins who enforce strict definitions of > scope. The ApacheWiki will remain with it's 3 official > WikiAdmins, and a separate instance of UseModWiki or SubWiki > will be installed for each PMC which opts to create a Wiki. > PMCs are accountable to the Board, and making PMCs > responsible for Wiki content will "close the accountability > loop". This would also centralize oversight for each PMC, > (for example) an Avalon UseMod or SubWiki instance can be set > up, and individuals responsible for enforcing scope and > content regulations will be able to check a wiki specific > RecentChanges page for only Avalon. This would also allow for an > opportunity to experiment with different Wiki technologies - > much like different PMCs have different websites. Allowing > for heterogenous technologies, will also make it easier for > PMCs to experiment with different patches to UseMod, SubWiki, > PhpWiki, Twiki, etc.. > > A PMC can choose not to have a Wiki. In this case, if an > individual attempts to post content related to that PMC, it > will be the responsibility of the ApacheWiki admins to remove > the content and inform the PMC in question. > > -------- > Tim O'Brien > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 4:28 PM > > To: community@apache.org > > Subject: Re: Wiki - we have a problem :) > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Costin Manolache wrote: > > > > > Are we now going to have similar "oversight" over the > mailing lists > > > and archives ? If someone posts a pointer to warez or porn > > on one of > > > the lists > > > - are we going to have to remove it from archives ? > > > > We have, in my opinion, sufficient oversight on the mailing > > list already: > > > > -> Mailing list are clearly assigned to specific commiter groups > > or pmcs; who is responsible is clear. > > > > -> Most, if not all, of the committers and PMC members are > > subscribed to the mailing list and are clearly reading > > their mail. > > > > -> We have moderation in place, and developer lists generally have > > clear and well defined scopes which are visibly policed. > > > > -> We see active policing of totally off topic data. > > > > This is quite in contrast to the -current- wiki site; where > > we lack clear mapping of sections to PMC's or commiter > > groups, where we have yet no clear indication that any and > > all changes are actively followed by the majority of the > > committers in that section and no clear scoping. > > > > Dw > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
