Re: Moving the wiki

--Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 10/28, Brian Proffitt wrote: oVirt.org, which may render this discussion moot. At least, the discussion= of shifting away from OpenShift, based on MediaWiki. We may want to migrat= e away for other reasons, but this will probably not be one of them. ed) user collaboration. But that collaboration is not terribly organized, a= nd has no version control whatsoever. This makes it impossible for a group = like Content Services to scrape documentation content into their process, a= nd the end-user experience is also sub-optimal. iddleman-based when we revamp the site later this year. This would mean tha= t content would be stored on GitHub as markdown (MD) or HTML files, and the= n Middleman would be used to edit content locally as well as deploy onto th= e production site. This is currently how projectatomic.io handles=20 olution is drastic, but Garrett LeSage and Tuomas Kuosmanen have come up wi= th 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/s= ection in prose.io, where a user could then edit the content and save it wi= th a simple GUI that would bypass the complexity of git commands. Depending= on the user's permissions, the edited content would be deployed immediatel= y 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) n 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 i= nterface (only available when running in development).=20 > From a user perspective, the experience is no different than using a wiki= =2E If we use prose.io, will have to have a GitHub account, but for our use= rs, that's not much or a hurdle, since they would have to have a MediaWiki = account on oVirt.org anyway.=20 > There are issues to narrow down with this plan (like how do oVirt.org use= rs add new pages?), but so far, it feels like a good solution and a positiv= e step away from MediaWiki. > Peace, > Brian > --=20 > 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(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra --=20 David Caro Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Tel.: +420 532 294 605 Email: dcaro(a)redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605 --Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi Content-Type: application/pgp-signature --Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi--