Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
On Tue, May 8, 2007 3:32 pm, Bram Moolenaar wrote: The main goal now is to get the Vim tips collection back to live. It has been dead for three months now! I wasn't aware of this, and it's definitely a problem. Here's what I propose we do: 1. Finalize a tip formatting standard. 2. Use the best available script that supports this standard. 3. Update the best available script if necessary. 4. Revise the standard if necessary. 5. Convert a tips sample. 6. Review the sample and revise the script if necessary. Once we're done with all of that, we can revisit the question of which wiki we'll use and then convert all of the tips. Since this project is lagging, let's also use the following standards: 1. Let's use this mailing list to coordinate the project. All comments regarding wiki page format, however, should be written to the talk section of the affected wiki page. If you're unsure as to where to post your comment, then just post it to this mailing list. 2. Let's set a deadline for signing off of the wiki formatting standard of 5/21. 2. Let's set a deadline for determining the best conversion script of standard of 6/4. This is just a start, and I'm open to all opinions/criticism. I just want to give this project a shot in the arm so that we can resurrect one of the best features of the Vim editor. What do yo guys think? Perhaps we can figure out some clever way to also make the help files available with links between the tips and the help files. Thus in the help file you would see some link that takes you to a tip associated with the text at that position. But without that the tips are still very useful. -- From know your smileys: O:-) Saint /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org /// \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
Am Mittwoch, den 09.05.2007, 10:33 -0500 schrieb Tom Purl: I wasn't aware of this, and it's definitely a problem. Here's what I propose we do: First, im not sure about what you mean by a) formatting standard and b) a script that supports the standard is a) something like a template in mediawiki-speak? see: http://home.comcast.net/~gerisch/MediaWikiTemplates.html http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Templates is b) something that reads the tips-db on vim.org and posts it to the wiki? Everything else is agreed and appreciated :-) Seb. PS: When writing this mail I got my hands dirty on the scratchpad of wikia.com: http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/VimTest http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Tip PPS: There are extensions for mediawiki that could be useful: To supply a HTML-Form to submit a tip: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Inputbox To order a list of pages by popularity http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php/Manual Both are installed on wikia.org
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
On Wed, May 9, 2007 11:37 am, Sebastian Menge wrote: First, im not sure about what you mean by a) formatting standard and b) a script that supports the standard is a) something like a template in mediawiki-speak? see: http://home.comcast.net/~gerisch/MediaWikiTemplates.html http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Templates By formatting standard, I mean that we need to agree on how we want the tips to look once they're converted and posted to the wiki. Basically, what do we want the tips to look like so we can tweak the conversion script (if necessary). is b) something that reads the tips-db on vim.org and posts it to the wiki? Here, I'm referring to the script that will convert the scripts from their current format to their future, wiki-fied format. We already have 3 or 4 scripts that could do this. Everything else is agreed and appreciated :-) Thanks! Seb. PS: When writing this mail I got my hands dirty on the scratchpad of wikia.com: http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/VimTest http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Tip PPS: There are extensions for mediawiki that could be useful: To supply a HTML-Form to submit a tip: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Inputbox To order a list of pages by popularity http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php/Manual Both are installed on wikia.org We do have a Wikia site available if we want it (http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page). I agree with you; it has a lot of nice features, and may give us a bit more flexibility than the wikibooks option. I think we should revisit this topic once we're ready to start the real conversion.
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
Am Mittwoch, den 09.05.2007, 13:06 -0500 schrieb Tom Purl: We do have a Wikia site available if we want it (http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page). I agree with you; it has a lot of nice features, and may give us a bit more flexibility than the wikibooks option. I think we should revisit this topic once we're ready The features are mostly the same. In fact all major extensions are installed on wikibooks too. On any mediawiki try out the page Special:Version to see all installed extensions: http://wikibooks.org/wiki/Special:Version Note the modules SpamBlacklist, UsernameBlacklist and ConfirmEdit (Captcha) Wikia.com is clearly aimed at making money with ads. Therefore I now vote for wikibooks.org. :-) Sebastian.
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
Ian Tegebo wrote: On 5/6/07, Sebastian Menge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all Independent of the implementation used, I suggest to develop good guidelines. The Wiki should be really valuable and not redundant to vim-tips or mailing-lists. I would like to make another implementation independent suggestion; one could make a VimWiki more valuable by importing the _extremely_ valuable vim helpfiles into it. Please don't do this. It might sound like a nice idea, but it means making a branch that will be very hard to merge back into the help files of the distribution. I feel misunderstood but it serves me right for not saying what I mean... Synchronizing data is no fun, I agree. While I was up in the clouds I was imaging that the wiki would be the authoritative source for the helpfiles after doing an initial _import_. Then the text version would be exported as needed, e.g. end user runtime update or for a new release. That's the problem: It's very easy to change the text in the wiki in such a way it won't be possible to put back in the distribution. Also, I need to check every change, at least briefly (depend on where the change comes from). That is the only way to maintain the quality. Thus I would need a list of changes, preferably in the form of a patch. When people change the wiki in various ways this will quickly become a nightmare. Taking the existing help files and _adding_ to them is good. Especially if corrections and additions are marked somehow, so that they eventually end up in the distribution. Otherwise links to tips can be added. I'm currently working on the 7.1 release and then will go travelling, thus I won't have much time to discuss the tips wiki. I certainly encourage everybody to make it work. After all, a wiki is a collaborative work! -- From know your smileys: 2B|^2B Message from Shakespeare /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org/// \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org///
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:06 -0500, Tom Purl wrote: On Wed, May 9, 2007 11:37 am, Sebastian Menge wrote: First, im not sure about what you mean by a) formatting standard and b) a script that supports the standard is a) something like a template in mediawiki-speak? see: http://home.comcast.net/~gerisch/MediaWikiTemplates.html http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Templates By formatting standard, I mean that we need to agree on how we want the tips to look once they're converted and posted to the wiki. Basically, what do we want the tips to look like so we can tweak the conversion script (if necessary). Put me down as voting for 'simplistic'. ie no fancy boxes/backgrounds just bold headings and maybe a splash of Vim green somewhere. (Man pages come to mind) is b) something that reads the tips-db on vim.org and posts it to the wiki? Here, I'm referring to the script that will convert the scripts from their current format to their future, wiki-fied format. We already have 3 or 4 scripts that could do this. Everything else is agreed and appreciated :-) Thanks! Seb. PS: When writing this mail I got my hands dirty on the scratchpad of wikia.com: http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/VimTest http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Tip PPS: There are extensions for mediawiki that could be useful: To supply a HTML-Form to submit a tip: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Inputbox To order a list of pages by popularity http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php/Manual Both are installed on wikia.org We do have a Wikia site available if we want it (http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page). I agree with you; it has a lot of nice features, and may give us a bit more flexibility than the wikibooks option. I think we should revisit this topic once we're ready to start the real conversion. cheers, -- Mark
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
Am Montag, den 07.05.2007, 16:07 -0700 schrieb Ian Tegebo: The Wiki would ideally understand how to link to vim-scripts and vim-tips like vimonline currently does. As a bonus, mailing-list posts would also linkable Easy:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interwiki#Shorthand_for_non-wiki_sites For Wikia: http://www.wikia.com/wiki/Interwiki_map But this touches the critical point: The real question is, howto organize/access existing contributions (and contribution channels) from a wiki. Wikipages are generic, while tips, scripts, plugins, helpfiles etc. have more structure and - perhaps because of that - an established infrastructure. There is nothing against writing new things freely in the wiki and then, afterwards, copy them to svn or make a script/plugin/syntax-file/tutor or whatever ... Probably one could also easily write some html-form that submits a tip/script to the database on vim.org I would like to see the VimWiki as a kind of portal to the plethora of vim-related material. (Recall the slogan: Avoid redundancy!) In such a community-driven portal, each contributor has an interest to get her contribution found. Thus there is no need for a centralized management as on vim.org. A question to the experienced users/developers: How is that plethora organized internally? What are the main (most important, most popular) sections? Sebastian.
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
Ian Tegebo wrote: On 5/6/07, Sebastian Menge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all Independent of the implementation used, I suggest to develop good guidelines. The Wiki should be really valuable and not redundant to vim-tips or mailing-lists. I would like to make another implementation independent suggestion; one could make a VimWiki more valuable by importing the _extremely_ valuable vim helpfiles into it. Please don't do this. It might sound like a nice idea, but it means making a branch that will be very hard to merge back into the help files of the distribution. Please use the wiki for tips. That is an addition to the help files. For example, I would love to be able to quickly correct spelling mistakes or contribute to plugin helpfiles a la a Wiki interface. I could then imagine updating my local helpfiles through the Wiki interface via a sync-plugin. If you see spelling mistakes in the help files please send them to me. I just fixed 250 of them, because someone send me a list. That's useful for everyone. The main goal now is to get the Vim tips collection back to live. It has been dead for three months now! Perhaps we can figure out some clever way to also make the help files available with links between the tips and the help files. Thus in the help file you would see some link that takes you to a tip associated with the text at that position. But without that the tips are still very useful. -- From know your smileys: O:-) Saint /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org/// \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org///
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
On 2007-05-08, Ian Tegebo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/8/07, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ian Tegebo wrote: I would like to make another implementation independent suggestion; one could make a VimWiki more valuable by importing the _extremely_ valuable vim helpfiles into it. Please don't do this. It might sound like a nice idea, but it means making a branch that will be very hard to merge back into the help files of the distribution. I feel misunderstood but it serves me right for not saying what I mean... Synchronizing data is no fun, I agree. While I was up in the clouds I was imaging that the wiki would be the authoritative source for the helpfiles after doing an initial _import_. Then the text version would be exported as needed, e.g. end user runtime update or for a new release. This seems like a bad idea. The vim help files are an authoritative source because their content is under the control of an authority: Bram. Others are encouraged to submit patches that correct errors or clarify wording, but before any of those patches are applied, Bram looks at them to be sure they are correct and consistent with the help files' style. A wiki allows every Tom, Dick and Harry to make changes to it, whether they know what they're talking about or not. Wikis are useful, but it's difficult to ensure their correctness. Requiring Bram to vet every page before it is included in vim's help files would be an undue burden on him as well as a poor use of his time. A wiki is a good idea, but the content should be separate from the help files. Regards, Gary -- Gary Johnson | Agilent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Mobile Broadband Division | Spokane, Washington, USA
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
On 5/8/07, Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2007-05-08, Ian Tegebo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/8/07, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ian Tegebo wrote: I would like to make another implementation independent suggestion; one could make a VimWiki more valuable by importing the _extremely_ valuable vim helpfiles into it. Please don't do this. It might sound like a nice idea, but it means making a branch that will be very hard to merge back into the help files of the distribution. I feel misunderstood but it serves me right for not saying what I mean... Synchronizing data is no fun, I agree. While I was up in the clouds I was imaging that the wiki would be the authoritative source for the helpfiles after doing an initial _import_. Then the text version would be exported as needed, e.g. end user runtime update or for a new release. This seems like a bad idea. The vim help files are an authoritative source because their content is under the control of an authority: Bram. Others are encouraged to submit patches that correct errors or clarify wording, but before any of those patches are applied, Bram looks at them to be sure they are correct and consistent with the help files' style. I was assuming the wiki that would be chosen would allow for some level of access control. I'm also assuming a group of trusted long-time users could be delegated the responsibility of administering the wiki. If Bram is the only one who should make changes to an object than I agree that those objects wouldn't be useful in a wiki. I think it's possible to have a protected part of the wiki for helpfiles that is write restricted and have another part that is more open that can easily reference those files. Of course, if the value added by more hands on the helpfiles doesn't exceed the cost in maintenance than this is a poor choice. I don't think I've really seen any issues with updates to helpfiles, they were just an example. So far I think the point was to just be able to link to parts of them more easily - I didn't really mean to dwell on the help system. I was just hoping to carry the point that wikis _can_ provide a lot of valuable function if properly cultivated. In all this I've lost track of what the purpose of a VimWiki would be. Was it just meant to host vim tips? Thinking about the format of tips now, I wonder if a blog format wouldn't be more suitable. For example, tips are posts that then have comments while most blogs have these features as well as search and RSS. VimBlog? To this end I wonder if there are enough people to support more apps given the work load the vimonline team has: Bugs https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=391887group_id=27891func=browse Features https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=391890group_id=27891func=browse -- Ian Tegebo
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
On 5/6/07, Sebastian Menge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all Independent of the implementation used, I suggest to develop good guidelines. The Wiki should be really valuable and not redundant to vim-tips or mailing-lists. I would like to make another implementation independent suggestion; one could make a VimWiki more valuable by importing the _extremely_ valuable vim helpfiles into it. For example, I would love to be able to quickly correct spelling mistakes or contribute to plugin helpfiles a la a Wiki interface. I could then imagine updating my local helpfiles through the Wiki interface via a sync-plugin. The Wiki would ideally understand how to link to vim-scripts and vim-tips like vimonline currently does. As a bonus, mailing-list posts would also linkable and magical indexing would populate the bottom of each Wiki page with relevant search results from the list similar to O'Reilly's Safari. It's fun to dream! I'm serious about getting the helpfiles imported into the Wiki though. I know about the VimDoc project; I think this could be the next evolution in that direction. http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/usr_toc.html -- Ian Tegebo
VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
Hello Vim Developers, Hello Vim Users, some time ago there was a huge discussion about a Vim-Wiki. In the end WikiBooks has the highest support. Still some whished for a Vim-only-Wiki instead of beeing part of a larger project. For this a new option is not open: SourceForge ended the beta for there wiki support. We can now have a Vim-only-Wiki with just one mouse click. In fact we could have several because there are several Vim projects on SourceForge. It would be just for us, has a propper user maintainance, (desaster) backup by SourceForge themself and it can be personalised by CSS. All it takes to start is a project admin to activate the wiki. Martin [1] http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Learning_the_vi_editor/Vim -- Martin Krischik mailto://[EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: VimWiki - again - but with a brand new option
Hi all Independent of the implementation used, I suggest to develop good guidelines. The Wiki should be really valuable and not redundant to vim-tips or mailing-lists. I think it's also important to have some people feeling responsible for it so if someone doesn't follow the rules, they will tidy it up quickly. my 2 cents, Sebastian. PS: I would clearly prefer wikia.org over sf.net (I would not build up upon any beta ...)
