Re: Moving the wiki

From: "David Caro" <dcaroest(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Brian Proffitt" <bproffit(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: infra(a)ovirt.org Sent: Friday, November 7, 2014 6:13:48 AM Subject: Re: Moving the wiki On 10/28, Brian Proffitt wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Karsten Wade" <kwade(a)redhat.com&gt; > > To: infra(a)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 > > _______________________________________________ > > Infra mailing list > > Infra(a)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(a)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: dcaro(a)redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605