omething we can do, or we can make an infra
> JIRA issue for
>
> 3. replace existing MoinMoin sites with links to cwiki
> https://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-lucene/
> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/
>
>
> ryan
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 12:48 PM, M
d in various ways auto genereate
> parts of the docs.
I'll open up the JIRA issues.
>
> This way we can migrate Wiki software without being held up by the need to
> rewrite everything, and we do not need to keep updating two systems.
I'm investigating ways to make thi
n for version 4.0
only, but first outlining the structure and placeholder pages and then filling
in the meat. A good thing about Confluence is that we could probably use macros
to link to SVN and Javadoc and in various ways auto genereate parts of the docs.
This way we can migrate Wiki software wi
e long run, it will result in a much better
experience for our users.
>
> 3. replace existing MoinMoin sites with links to cwiki
> https://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-lucene/
> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/
>
>
> ryan
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 1
/solr/
ryan
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
> I know there was a long debate about wiki software and docs and what not. It
> got long enough that I petered out on it.
>
> In some ways, I guess this is a lazy plea for someone that did follow along
> to s
I know there was a long debate about wiki software and docs and what not. It
got long enough that I petered out on it.
In some ways, I guess this is a lazy plea for someone that did follow along to
summarize. Did we get anywhere? Is there an action item to start on?
I'm in the same spot
: OK, so how about this for Solr documentation on the website:
: pseudo-versioned live docs.
:
: The docs for 4x live under
: solr/4 or solr/doc/4
:
: These docs wouldn't be strictly versioned... we would continue
: updating the docs as needed after a release.
...
: A different question
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> I could see that we move "official docs" to the CMS and leave the wiki for
> new things, etc. and for user generated recipes, etc.
OK, so how about this for Solr documentation on the website:
pseudo-versioned live docs.
The docs for 4x liv
On Feb 9, 2012, at 3:57 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> I could see that we move "official docs" to the CMS and leave the wiki for
>> new things, etc. and for user generated recipes, etc.
>
> Why wouldn't these be orthogonal decisions (assumin
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> I could see that we move "official docs" to the CMS and leave the wiki for
> new things, etc. and for user generated recipes, etc.
Why wouldn't these be orthogonal decisions (assuming confluence can
support permissions):
a) what CMS/Wiki to
Couldn't the wiki be the home of comments, barring any other technology being a
better solution? Simply provide a link to the wiki page with the same name as
the CMS page.
Erik
On Feb 9, 2012, at 15:58 , Mark Miller wrote:
> I think that's a popular and superior model - committers
I think that's a popular and superior model - committers have access and users
can leave comments. If that means we start making committers out of heavy doc
helpers, that seems like a plus to me.
On Feb 9, 2012, at 3:48 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2012, at 7:35 AM, Yonik Seeley
On Feb 8, 2012, at 7:35 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> We should also consider having part of the wiki "committers only" (or
> others that we decide to give access). Just as with our code
> development, it doesn't always make sense to completely crowd-source
> documentation.
I could see that we move
FWIW: i have almost no opinion at all on what wiki software we use, but
that really just seems like the seed of this conversation...
: Specific to Solr, I think we should drop all the "back compat" in our
: documentation and target it toward 4.0
In an ideal world, i think the b
+1
We could have a section of the Wiki named SolrPedia serving as a high-quality
structured reference manual. Confluence allows templates for easier authoring
of these. There could be a "Concept" template, a "Component" template, a
"HowTo" template...
I think we could leave it open to all regi
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> Ryan had started on it some time ago, but was never completed.
>
> I thought that was maybe for the website, but not the wiki (I don't
> think we have a wiki space created yet?)
>
I wa
We should also consider having part of the wiki "committers only" (or
others that we decide to give access). Just as with our code
development, it doesn't always make sense to completely crowd-source
documentation.
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Ryan had started on it some time ago, but was never completed.
I thought that was maybe for the website, but not the wiki (I don't
think we have a wiki space created yet?)
> FWIW, I also think we should think about re-organizing some of ou
Well, at least some people have tried this:
https://studio.plugins.atlassian.com/wiki/display/UWC/UWC+MoinMoin+Notes
https://studio.plugins.atlassian.com/wiki/display/UWC/Universal+Wiki+Converter
Looks at a quick glance that the conversion might be hit-or-miss, but
if it worked...
On Wed, Feb
Ryan had started on it some time ago, but was never completed. One of the nice
things about Confluence is you can skin it to look similar to the website. In
fact, for Mahout, we've done exactly that. I think there are some scripts to
automate the migration.
FWIW, I also think we should think
+1 for confluence!
But I don't know how we can easily move the moin moin content to confluence...
Martijn
On 8 February 2012 04:28, Joe Cabrera wrote:
> On 02/07/2012 09:09 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>>
>> As long as I'm talking about possible improvements I'd like to work on:
>>
>> Anyone else have
On 02/07/2012 09:09 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
As long as I'm talking about possible improvements I'd like to work on:
Anyone else have an itch to dump moin moin for confluence? I've used both, and
I think that confluence is just far superior.
Also, moin moin has a very dated look, and it's hard t
As long as I'm talking about possible improvements I'd like to work on:
Anyone else have an itch to dump moin moin for confluence? I've used both, and
I think that confluence is just far superior.
Also, moin moin has a very dated look, and it's hard to make modern looking
wiki pages - confluenc
23 matches
Mail list logo
