Future of the oVirt website

Marc Dequènes (Duck) duck at redhat.com
Fri Jan 6 05:13:59 UTC 2017


Quack,

So I just discovered this thread:
  http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2017-January/029097.html

First, it would be nice if the infra team was involved directly, because
not everyone is also an oVirt developer (and on this list). Also there
are already plans to improve the site system and build and this
side-initiative feels like an unexpected and rude disruption of energy
already invested.

It seems people forget how things were in the past, which leads to going
back and forth between a new solution and the previous one. People wish
for an easy way to contribute, and this is a legitimate goal. After some
time an easy solution make things complicated because it is such a mess
and there is no review, so no quality checks, and people wish to have
workflows. Then they find it to cumbersome and wish to go back to a
marvelous past. And so on again and again.

This said, this does not mean the current solution is perfect and we
should not think about a better one, but we should recall why we
abandoned a wiki to switch to the current solution, so we don't fall
into the same traps.

What I can say on the topic is that migrating is painful, so we should
be cautious. OSAS is not here to force a solution upon you, but the
infra team (and the OSAS folks too), have a limited workforce to
dedicate to this project, so let's make something realistic. Also we
just finish another pass of cleanup of the current site, with migration
bugs from the previous Mediawiki solution, so keep in mind it would
probably take _years_ to really get something clean. Who's gonna do this?

I also wanted to say I totally disagree on someone's remark (somewhere
in the thread) about doc not being as important as code. A lot of
content is obsolete or mistaken in the current site already, and this
means giving a very bad image of the project, raising the number of
silly questions people come to bother you with on ML or IRC, so I think
doc should really be taken seriously. As a user it is often I have to
dig in the code to find undocumented features, or why a documented one
does not work as said, and that's fu^Wutterly boring.

So this was to gather all related parties.

\_o<

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/infra/attachments/20170106/3cfb9761/attachment.sig>


More information about the Infra mailing list