On 9/17/08, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: > Marcus Moeller wrote: >> I have not really suggested to use this or that. I just wantet to make >> clear that we should keep the content in one single place for better >> maintainance. > > I agree. And trac provides a very good mechanism for this. Given that > its in use such widely, a lot of people are already familiar with the > milestones / aims / features and the fact that you can url into the scm > from the wiki makes in-revision tracking trivial. You can also assocated > issues with milestones and releases and handle wiki content within the > same context. > > So it can be as easy as you want, but it can also easily do more complex > things if you need it to. > >> There are some disadvantages in using trac which I have already lined >> out. One is the 'bad url' to access the trac pages. If >> artwork.centos.org (or something like that) would link to trac and the >> wiki just points there, all content could be kept in the trac wiki. > > the URL issue does not look like anything major to me personally, also I > dont see much of a differences in https://projects.centos.org/ and > http://artwork.centos.org. Specially since the trac wiki is only 1 click > away from the https://projects.centos.org link. The wiki.centos.org page > at http://wiki.centos.org/Projects can have a few more comments about > each project if so required. Ok. I believe we should move the http://wiki.centos.org/ArtWork content to https://projects.centos.org/trac/artwork/wiki ... if there is no one against that. So the Trac facilities on projects management could be used. If that is ok ... some help would be nice :D Cheers, al.