On 10/28, Brian Proffitt wrote:
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Karsten Wade" <kw...@redhat.com>
> > To: infra@ovirt.org
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 9:44:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: Moving the wiki
> > 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > On 10/22/2014 11:19 AM, Michael Scherer wrote:
> > > I still think the easiest way is to host our own setup.
> > 
> > Two notes:
> > 
> > * While there is definitely increased work for the Infra team in
> > bringing it back from OpenShift, it also takes away some of the work
> > being done to keep the OpenShift instance running well.
> > 
> > * We can always move back about as easily, such as when service
> > features are at parity.
> > 
> > One of my concerns about OpenShift is that it now doesn't fit into the
> > rest of the Infra scheme. If we're maintaining everything with
> > Foreman/Puppet, for example, wouldn't it be a bit easier to bring the
> > wiki server in to the same scheme?
> > 
> > It's like the problems we have with linode01.ovirt.org -- it's outside
> > of the rest of the process Infra uses, so it's more likely problems
> > will build up there until they get noticed.
> > 
> > - - Karsten
> > - --
> > Karsten 'quaid' Wade        .^\          CentOS Doer of Stuff
> > http://TheOpenSourceWay.org    \  http://community.redhat.com
> > @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC)  \v'             gpg: AD0E0C41
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1
> > 
> > iEYEARECAAYFAlRH+vAACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEHEOwCgnGCFXO7tKVAoCM4YfkM0MYSs
> > Er8AniDXc74R7QYk7s62s+nxZ1sTnn37
> > =IgIn
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > _______________________________________________
> > Infra mailing list
> > Infra@ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
> > 
> 
> At Barak's request, I wanted to outline what should be the next phase for 
> oVirt.org, which may render this discussion moot. At least, the discussion of 
> shifting away from OpenShift, based on MediaWiki. We may want to migrate away 
> for other reasons, but this will probably not be one of them.
> 
> oVirt.org is currently a MediaWiki site, and as such has a lot of (expected) 
> user collaboration. But that collaboration is not terribly organized, and has 
> no version control whatsoever. This makes it impossible for a group like 
> Content Services to scrape documentation content into their process, and the 
> end-user experience is also sub-optimal.
> 
> As an alternative, the OSAS design team wants oVirt.org to move over to 
> Middleman-based when we revamp the site later this year. This would mean that 
> content would be stored on GitHub as markdown (MD) or HTML files, and then 
> Middleman would be used to edit content locally as well as deploy onto the 
> production site. This is currently how projectatomic.io handles 
> 
> Clearly, moving from a wiki to something static like a Middleman/GitHub 
> solution is drastic, but Garrett LeSage and Tuomas Kuosmanen have come up 
> with an idea: prose.io is a third-party WYSIWYG editor that ties directly in 
> to GitHub repos. We will have links on the new oVirt.org site for each page 
> or section of a page that would open up the source content for that 
> page/section in prose.io, where a user could then edit the content and save 
> it with a simple GUI that would bypass the complexity of git commands. 
> Depending on the user's permissions, the edited content would be deployed 
> immediately on the site or held as a pull request for later approval.
> 

Feels strange to me having a project outside gerrit, that means having
to setup and manage user acces also on github. Is there a way to use
gerrit as base repo and only replicate to github as we currently do
with other projects?

Is the requirement of a web ui a strict one? Because I really like the
idea of having the docs managed as code (reviews, git history and even
ci)

> An alternative to prose.io that Garrett has also proposed is bolting on an 
> admin UI for editing blog posts using various existing components (mainly for 
> rich editing), so the entire thing could be done via a browser-based 
> interface (only available when running in development). 
> 
> From a user perspective, the experience is no different than using a wiki. If 
> we use prose.io, will have to have a GitHub account, but for our users, 
> that's not much or a hurdle, since they would have to have a MediaWiki 
> account on oVirt.org anyway. 
> 
> There are issues to narrow down with this plan (like how do oVirt.org users 
> add new pages?), but so far, it feels like a good solution and a positive 
> step away from MediaWiki.
> 
> Peace,
> Brian
> 
> -- 
> Brian Proffitt
> 
> Community Liaison
> oVirt
> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
> Phone: +1 574 383 9BKP
> IRC: bkp @ OFTC
> _______________________________________________
> Infra mailing list
> Infra@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra

-- 
David Caro

Red Hat S.L.
Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D

Tel.: +420 532 294 605
Email: dc...@redhat.com
Web: www.redhat.com
RHT Global #: 82-62605

Attachment: pgpLf3N7VVpz3.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Infra mailing list
Infra@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra

Reply via email to