[CentOS-devel] What to do with wiki.centos.org ? (let's discuss it)

Tue Aug 30 07:42:49 UTC 2022
Fabian Arrotin <arrfab at centos.org>

On 25/08/2022 17:10, Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel wrote:
> On 25/08/2022 15:28, Robby Callicotte via CentOS-devel wrote:
>> On Thursday, August 25, 2022 8:46:18 AM CDT Neal Gompa wrote:
>>> I second this. Our quick docs could use MkDocs like the SIG stuff
>>> does, and the RHELish stuff can use the Antora system the RHEL docs
>>> folks want to use.
>> I agree with Neal here.  This seems to offer a good balance.  At this 
>> point I
>> would argue that the MR/PR nature of git is ubiquitous and is part of
>> everyone's workflow.
> 
> So far I've seen lots of "yes, use this" type comments so I'd like to 
> ask how this compares in user friendliness to the current wiki (assuming 
> that you can get to it because the spammers are taking a rest). I've 
> never used any of the alternatives that have been proposed so far. Are 
> they wikis? Are they usable for a non-technical user? The wiki, you 
> press a button and you can edit content directly and see what it will 
> look like before you save it. You can link to other pages easily, you 
> can format content how you want it easily, often just at the press of a 
> button.
> 
> None of what I've heard so far sounds even remotely as usable as what we 
> have now.
> 
> Trevor

It seems I opened a "Pandora's box" last week before the weekend ... :-)

To keep a long story short, I just wanted to announce that something 
needs to be done, and also explaining publicly why wiki is misbehaving 
on regular basis (so that people don't have wrong expectations about 
wiki online service)

what I see so far for wiki.centos.org :
- nothing is done and so it will just be deleted when centos 7 goes EOL 
in June 2024 (no, we'll not even consider having a c7 online past that 
EOL date)
- centos-docs team is having a look at migrating content to another wiki 
(the sooner the better then), like mediawiki or else
- or just consider moving to "static" sites (decision is up to people 
contributing content)

FWIW, actually it's possible to edit/contribute to SIG guide *without* 
having to learn the git workflow (like PR/MR, fork, commit, push, 
rebase, etc).

There is an "Edit this page" button/link on each page under 
https://sigs.centos.org/guide/ and it's just log you directly on 
git.centos.org (with SSO) to edit directly the page (if you have commit 
rights). It works also with github/gitlab

PS : we don't have to migrate it next week (even if I'd like to see 
current setup moved/migrated to something else soon) but just keeping in 
mind some EOL dates approaching and not waiting for last minute 
discussion ;-)

-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | twitter: @arrfab
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0xA25DBAFB17F3B7A1.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 12767 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20220830/3649e04e/attachment-0003.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20220830/3649e04e/attachment-0003.sig>