I prefer cwiki to the overly simplistic GitHub. —————— Visoar
gujiaweijoe <[email protected]> > Hi Yonny, > > > Thanks for your discussion. For some complicated discussions and topics , > Confulence wiki is a good place to capture the insights, collaborate on > ideas and track the project. > > > Best regards, > Gu Jiawei (Joe) > > > > > > ------------------ Original ------------------ > From: Yonny Hao <[email protected]> > Date: Wed,Jul 16,2025 5:54 PM > To: dev <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Tooling for Managing BifroMQ Technical > Documentation andImprovement Proposals > > > > Dear all, > > > As BifroMQ continues to grow, I’d like to initiate a discussion on which > > tooling we should adopt for managing our technical documentation, > > particularly community-driven improvement proposals. I have already > > requested the ASF Infra team to provision an Apache CWiki space for > > BifroMQ. CWiki offers good support for collaboration and versioning, which > > I believe are helpful for our use cases. However, an alternative would be > > to simply use GitHub Wiki. Personally, I lean toward using *CWiki*, > > especially for collaboratively authoring and tracking improvement proposals > > over time. But I’d love to hear what others think. > > > Please share your thoughts. This thread will remain open for *48 hours* to > collect feedback from all committers. > > Best regards, > -- > Yonny(Yu) Hao
