So, I agree a space would be helpful. Although it's old school and inconvenient, the mailing list is the canonical place for discussion. We currently use GitHub issues a lot, but that's copied to a mailing list (as is our old JIRA space), so if people want to participate without a GitHub account, they can still do that. There are certain options that are perhaps less convenient, such as just using the mailing list and our dev SVN space, but still more appropriate than options that would be less ubiquitous for potential participants.
I think the ASF Confluence is probably fine, for storing, editing, and collaborating on shared documents, but decisions about those would still need to be done on the mailing list. If I remember correctly, we used to have a Wiki space, prior to it being transferred to Confluence, but it was poorly maintained, so we abandoned it in favor of using the website for docs. I could be mis-remembering, but I think this is the case. It might explain why you can't create a Confluence space. My preference would be to just use the website. I think it's fine to have a dev / design area of the website, and we can discuss on GitHub issues for the accumulo-website repo. That is a bit less convenient than Confluence if it's used heavily, but it's more convenient in the sense that it's more accessible and fits more in line with our current mode of operation. Plus, when a document is final, it's easy to link to from our documentation, without making users jump to another service to view docs. I would be opposed to using GitHub wiki or a new git repo. We have enough repos. Although it seems like they are free, there is still a lot of boilerplate work to maintain them, from managing .github/workflows, .github/CONTRIBUTING.md, etc., to .asf.yaml, to README, to keeping copyright dates updated in the NOTICE file, and more. In summary, my preference: 1. Keep a space in accumulo-website, discuss on GH issues and mailing list (strongly preferred) 2. Confluence, discuss on mailing list (prefer over other options, but not a fan) 3. GitHub wiki, discuss on mailing list (strongly prefer not to use this option) 4. New GitHub repo, discuss on GH issues and mailing list (strongly prefer not to use this option) On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 12:30 PM Ed Coleman <edcole...@apache.org> wrote: > > Currently, asf cannot create new wiki's because of a Confluence issue > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-24291) I chatted with infra and > in response they created that issue. > > To expand on this discussion, I would like to toss out another alternative to > discuss / explore. What if we used a separate GitHub project, something like > Accumulo-Design, just like accumulo-proxy and accumulo-examples. As a > separate project, it would be available for collaboration for the community, > but remain separate from main project and the website to keep current code / > documentation / design clearly separate from speculative design discussions. > As a project: > > - document history would be preserved with git commit history. > - document collaboration could be done with normal PR submissions / reviews. > - issues could be used to discuss design aspects, capturing the comment > history. > > The biggest downside is that it would be yet another project to follow / > track. > > For me, I think the issue is that we need a public, collaborative space to > hold design discussions. Neither the main project or the web-site seem quite > appropriate and Confluence seems to lack the collaboration that can be > achieved with github. > > We need a space to capture the redesign and whatever we select can be made to > work - I'm just wondering what provides the easiest forum to build a > collaborative space for the Accumulo community. > > Ed Coleman > > > On 2023/02/28 16:35:31 dlmar...@comcast.net wrote: > > Circling back on this issue - I agree that comments and such make sense for > > internal design documents. I'm going to create an INFRA ticket for a cwiki > > space for Accumulo unless there are any objections. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Drew Farris <d...@ill.org> > > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 5:16 PM > > To: dev@accumulo.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Enable Github wiki in asf.yaml? > > > > As mentioned, wikis can provide a streamlined collaborative editing > > workflow that's less labor intensive than updating a website. They can > > promote collaboration by providing specific tooling to support comments, > > revisions and iteration. > > > > In terms of preservation, GH wikis act just like any other Git repository, > > with a remote at (for example) g...@github.com:apache/accumulo.wiki.git > > IIRC the pages are just GH flavored markdown. There are at least a few > > Apache projects using them. > > > > However, GH wikis lack some features that I feel are important to support > > collaborative authoring. For example, the ability to comment and discuss > > specific passages in a document is a feature that's present in Cwiki, but > > not in GH wikis. I've come appreciate this this in my google docs and > > office workflows, so expect that it would be useful for Accumulo design > > discussions too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 2:54 PM Keith Turner <ktur...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > I would like to try a wiki for design documents, I think it would be > > > less cumbersome than the website and we can always link from the > > > website and issues to the wiki. I think its ok to give it a try and > > > abandon it in the future, if abandoned would just need to properly > > > communicate that. The content should be archived in Apache > > > infrastructure, so if GH wiki does not do that then we should not use > > > it. If GH wiki is not an option then could try cwiki. > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 7:55 AM <dlmar...@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > I reverted the change. I didn't think it would be a big deal, but if > > > > it > > > requires discussion, then let's discuss it. > > > > > > > > I'm looking for a place to host information related to internal > > > > design > > > discussions. I envision these to be living documents that will be > > > updated over time as the design/implementation progresses and that > > > other committers will be able to comment on and edit. I don't feel > > > that the website is the correct place for this because: > > > > > > > > 1. I don't think internal design discussions should go on the > > > > project > > > website. > > > > 2. Changes to the design documents could not be seen by others > > > > right > > > away (IIRC changes to the website are built and available at > > > https://accumulo.staged.apache.org/, but human intervention is > > > required to publish it at https://accumulo.apache.org/). > > > > > > > > I looked in the INFRA issues and other projects are using the GH > > > > Wiki > > > feature and I saw no mention of backing it up or the requirement to do > > > so (maybe they rely on GitHub backing it up?). It does appear that we > > > would need an INFRA ticket so that they can modify the GitHub project > > > settings to lock the GitHub wiki down so that only committers can > > > modify it. If GitHub Wiki is not acceptable, then I think Apache > > > Confluence ( > > > https://cwiki.apache.org) might be an acceptable alternative. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> > > > > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 4:41 AM > > > > To: accumulo-dev <dev@accumulo.apache.org> > > > > Cc: comm...@accumulo.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: [accumulo] branch main updated: Enable Github wiki in > > > asf.yaml > > > > > > > > I don't recall a discussion about this change, but I think it goes > > > against previous efforts to make the website the one canonical > > > location for our documentation. I don't even think infra is backing up > > > wiki repos, so there wouldn't even be a record of the wiki contents in > > > ASF spaces (vs. the main repo, which is backed up to GitBox and the > > > issue tracker, which CCs the notifications list). > > > > > > > > In short, I think this should be reverted and we should not use the > > > GitHub wiki. If we need to store documents in a version controlled > > > way, we can store them on the website, or in our project's SVN dev > > > space. The wiki is just another place people would have to follow if > > > they want to participate, and I don't think that serves us. Therefore, > > > I think we shouldn't use it. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 15:59 <dlmar...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository. > > > > > > > > > > dlmarion pushed a commit to branch main in repository > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/accumulo.git > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/main by this push: > > > > > new ae8a817e7b Enable Github wiki in asf.yaml ae8a817e7b is > > > > > described below > > > > > > > > > > commit ae8a817e7b2af8c64096ed1a4274eaef44c0e677 > > > > > Author: Dave Marion <dlmar...@apache.org> > > > > > AuthorDate: Fri Feb 24 15:59:10 2023 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > Enable Github wiki in asf.yaml > > > > > --- > > > > > .asf.yaml | 2 +- > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/.asf.yaml b/.asf.yaml index bc2c943e82..08aa357082 > > > > > 100644 > > > > > --- a/.asf.yaml > > > > > +++ b/.asf.yaml > > > > > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ github: > > > > > - big-data > > > > > - hacktoberfest > > > > > features: > > > > > - wiki: false > > > > > + wiki: true > > > > > issues: true > > > > > projects: true > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
