[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Wiki Migration



The problem I'm seeing here is that Fedora is trying to find a balance between keeping spammers and other trash out while allowing as many people as possible to edit the wiki and put quality information in it. The result is this mess of a wiki we have right now, using Moin and connecting it partially to the Fedora Account System.

As for CMS + Wiki thing, Enano by default in wiki mode allows anyone to edit, but it provides a simple option to switch it so that only logged in users can edit, and everything can be logged and reversed if necessary. The use of AES in Enano to do user authentication makes it much more secure than other CMSes for logged in accounts. If Fedora wants to allow free editing of the wiki, they need to disconnect the website from the Fedora Account System. The Fedora Account System connection to Moin is a bad idea because it is more or less a front of elitist kind of way. It says that you can register on the wiki, but in order to get access to edit the wiki, you have to set up a Fedora Account in FAS, get an SSH key, GPG key and all that other crock and mess that you really shouldn't have in dealing with a wiki.

I have been talking to upstream about Enano, and through our talks, Enano has basic Postgres support. If we do decide to go with Enano, upstream has offered to help design the theme to look similar to the main website of Fedora project. Since he designed the Deluge website themes, I am confident that he could design it into Enano. Also for those who want to use static pages, Enano does expose an "anonymous API" that lets php pages designed to be static use certain functions of Enano, like the theming engine.

The demo works fine in Konqueror included in Fedora 8. Are you using the demo at http://demo.enanocms.org ? The demo at opensourcecms.com doesn't work because they inject advert code into everything. A fix for that has already been pushed into Mercurial once it was discovered, but it is unknown whether or not OpenSourceCMS.com is aware of the issue.

On Dec 21, 2007 9:49 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath redhat com> wrote:
Marc Wiriadisastra wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> As discussed on IRC my vote is anything that has a CMS built into it.
>>>
>>> I personally feel a lot of things are done behind closed doors and
>>> really feeding the hungry public with information of whats coming up and
>>> things that have occurred is nothing but a bonus.
>>>
>>>
>> This is completely false.  On the websites (content) side:
>>
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/ShowUs There's also the websites
>> list, the docs list, #fedora-websites and #fedora-docs.
>>
>> If you're interested in the hosting side of things you'll want to talk
>> to the Infrastructure team.  We have weekly meetings, there's the
>> #fedora-admin channel and the fedora-infrastructure-list.  If you think
>> we should replace the wiki with the CMS feel free to state your case on
>> that list and we'll discuss but I think you'll find that for most
>> content that would require a CMS the docs team handles that (and they're
>> currently moving towards a CMS).  If you think you can organize the wiki
>> with a CMS and that its the best way to go, lets see the proposal.
>>
>>> I've been advised that plone does this as do other CMS/Wiki's out there.
>>> There are Java based one's out there already I'm not to sure how they
>>> fit into the scheme of things but information to help the marketing,
>>> ambassadors and other contributors to Fedora would be helpful.
>>>
>> We've been trying to get plone up and running for not 1, not 2 but going
>> on 3 years now when February hits.  We even have a big Plone advocate
>> working on it with the docs team and yet its still not here.  I'm not
>> saying anything bad about the technology but I'm a pretty results
>> oriented guy and the proof is in the pudding.  Plone is a resource /
>> attention needy application.  I hope the docs guys get a good product
>> out of it but in general I'd like to see Fedora's commitment to Plone
>> stop there until such a time comes that it can play well with the
>> language it was written in (just my 2 cents).
>>
>>     -Mike
>>
>>
>
> While I understand that it isn't just one website I would like to think
> that there is sufficient technology around that an integrated wiki/cms
> type solution is out there for the sake of ease.
>
> While my suggestion of Plone is based on the small amount of information
> I have. I personally have not used it so my information is based on
> other people's opinions.
>
> My opinion is based on http://www.gentoo.org/ where they have links to
> associated sections. News is on the front page mainly the Newsletter but
> at least its a form of letting people know what is going on.
>
We have a rotating banner with Fedora Weekly News as well as a current
open ticket:

https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/178

for a news site.  Just needs worker bees.
> I'm just hoping that there is a streamlined method out there.  Developer
> puts a feature page in the wiki it gets approved it gets shifted to a
> news item that says we are trying to get x thing implemented by Fedora
> x.
>
Adding process is typically just the opposite of streamline.  Anyone can
go and alter the wiki right now (and are encouraged to do so)

   -Mike


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]