Autor: Sam Michaels Data: A: Nigel Metheringham CC: exim-dev Assumpte: Re: [exim-dev] Talking point - websites, wikis and documentation
On 6/9/05, Nigel Metheringham <Nigel.Metheringham@???> wrote: > MoinMoin can dump content to static HTML, although I am not sure how
> good that output is. I have also wondered about changing wikis to
> (probably) mediawiki (ie wikipedia etc) as it appears to have better
> functionality for a load of things. Translating the content might be
> interesting.... The killer additional feature of mediawiki is the
> "discuss this..." parallel pages which exist with each content page.
Let's step back and list what needs to be accomplished:
1) PROTECTED documentation that is not to be changed, most likely
created from the DocBook file Philip hands out for each version
2) A way for exim users to offer commentary
3) An easy way for mirrors to rsync
Pros of wiki:
1) It's the latest craze
2) It allows anyone to edit anything and create new topics in the docs
3) Code is already written
Cons of wiki:
1) It's not mirror friendly...in fact, I doubt mirrors would be able
to handle it easily
2) #2 of the pro is sort of a mixed blessing...we DON'T want users to
add stuff to the published exim spec or create their own sections in
the docs, but merely to give tips/tricks/code on existing
documentation
3) Massive moderation from defacement would be necessary
Pros of a PHP.net-like setup:
1) We'd be writing the code so it can be tailored to exim
2) The "database" is just a regular file (sqlite) so it's mirror friendly
3) Docs are compiled automatically from the DocBook file
4) Published exim specs are set in stone
5) Comments are approved before being put online
Cons of a PHP.net-like type setup:
1) We have to write the code
2) Users cannot add their own topics--but do we really want them to
just add stuff to the docs?
3) Mirrors will REQUIRE PHP with the sqlite library
I just feel that wiki is not the answer here...we're creating
documentation with comments, not an all-editable encylopedia.
