Sounds like an editing disagreement wrapped in a conspiracy theory. As far as I know there is no conspiracy here. If there was I'd surely know about it ;-)
Who is Eschmenk? Does he or she know about DACM? Have they actually discussed the issue? If not they should probably start a discussion on the "Talk" page that is associated with that wiki page. Maybe they can come to a consensus there. Maybe one approach is to split this into two pages, one with the simpler core content, and a linked page that has all of the tutorial links? -Rob On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: > The posting quoted in extenso below was made today to the en-Forum. I have no > knowledge of Base or of the protocols of Wiki but I am anxious, as I am sure > are all working on OpenOffice, that users have as good an experience with it > as possible. This includes best advice. As I say, I have no knowledge of the > workings of Base, but I have seen the level and quality of advice offered by > DACM and other Forum volunteers who specialise in that area, so my instinct > would be to accept his considered opinion (and hence his Wiki postings) as > best advice. I am not certain how ths matter might be best progressed, so I > thought it best to lay before the dev ML. > > The full Forum thread is at > http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=63999 > At present the subsequent postings are for information relevant to the below > posting. I have inserted a few breaks to avoid gripes about long lines from > my mailer. > > The posting is: > ---------- > Subject: A Base issue cover-up? > Poster: DACM (Forum volunteer) > > I consider it a distinct privilege to participate in this and other community > forums, predominately in support of Base. The moderators have endured my > sometimes outspoken critique of Base in the process of urging Base users to > adopt a reliable database configuration for production data. I simply joined > the > [url=http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=17567]campaign > of [b]r4zoli[/b][/url], [b]Sliderule[/b], [b]Villeroy[/b] and many others as > we've sought to maintain a proper balance between transparency and > Base/Office promotion -- as avid users ourselves. > > As a result, any 'seasoned' Base user is now keenly-aware of the Base > instabilities associated with storing database-files internally, within the > Base .odb file, otherwise known as 'embedded database' files. We continue to > encounter newer/un-aware users that have fallen victim, and find themselves > desperately begging for help with critical data recovery. For instance, > [url=http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=63986]here's > today's entry[/url]. > > Our support includes data-recovery, automated backups, configuration > tutorials, data-migration tutorials, > [url=http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=61183]automated > templates[/url], examples, personalized user-help, etc. To that end, I've > painstakingly generated detailed tutorials outlining each of these solutions > (up through concurrent database access among multiple users in networked > environments) to the official[color=#FF0000] > [url=http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/FAQ_(Base)#HSQLDB]Apache OpenOffice.org > Wiki[/url][/color]. > > I understand the nature of a Wiki (and the ability to 'undo' changes), but > apparently those tutorials were removed recently by [b]Eschmenk[/b] citing > "[i][url=http://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=FAQ_(Base)&action=history]Major > rewrite of some confusing sections.[/url][/i]" Now I can appreciate any > effort to clarify while condensing my prose, but this effort substantially > eliminated the tutorials and all links to this forum (leaving all others > intact), while further sanitizing the content of any reference to > data-corruption or known Base instabilities/workarounds/wizards/etc. > > In other words, [b]Eschmenk[/b] intentionally gutted the content and all > references to easy/automated solutions, while effectively eliminating all > motivation to avoid 'embedded database' files. What's left is a confusing and > suspicious fraction of the original tutorials and information. > > This is troubling because we can no longer presume that new and inexperienced > Base users have encountered data-corruption due to a lack of exposure to > information channels. [color=#FF0000]If [b]Eschmenk[/b] represents an > insider, then we we will soon be encountering victims who have lost data due > to a lack of motivation/awareness, due to the sanitized nature of the > propaganda allowed through official channels.[/color] > > Thankfully, we enjoy much greater transparency in this forum which serves to > overcome the intentional misrepresentation of the facts by insiders. But it > still hurts to realize that we have such [apparent and blatant] dishonesty in > the form of a cover-up extant in the open-source community. :( > > See [url=http://www.mediafire.com/?m8yhn6xyc7mhewl]related excerpt[/url] (Sep > 03, 2013) from: [url=http://www.mediafire.com/?6h7cqhv66u6793d]FAQ (Base) - > Apache OpenOffice Wiki.pdf[/url] > > ... > -- > Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
