Dated wiki content

[tresf]

@Umcaruje's notes:

So, I've been doing a lot of categorizing of the articles on the wiki. I categorized all the Pages that need work into 3 categories:

• Incomplete
• Out of Date
• Too Complex

So if you are planning to work on the wiki (hint hint: @Spekular) you should work on the articles from those categories.

The second thing I wanted to talk about is that we should probably remove most of the old articles. They are full of non-working pictures and weird structure that does not fit in the current wiki structure. Since we are having a new site, I think that the wiki should start with a clean slate (only 1.0+ articles). (fixed)

I'd love to hear your guys's opinion on this. 🍺

@tresf's notes:

Ticked items are fixed.

• Do we have a need for the wiki news?
  • it currently points to our sourceforge download page which should be updated.
  • it seems like a redundant place to have announcements
  • I cannot imagine anyone "subscribes" to the wiki news, right? So these announcements sort of get in the way IMO
• Do we need a contact page
  • We already have a "get-involved" page which has the proper channels of contacting us.
• "Tip of the day" should have a better title unless we plan to implement this in our code.
  • I personally believe these should be combined with FAQ (possibly consider combining the formats to something a bit more condensed)
• Can we review these troubleshooting steps?
  • These are very platform specific, so we should consider a rewrite.
• "Artist documentation" is a bit misleading of a title
• We should probably make our theming article front row and center.
  • Musicians are artists, right? I don't even like this category title.
• Writers section
  • Do we need this? Couldn't we just reference some wikimedia standards?
  • I think this is misleading as well, since writing a wiki isn't necessarily a "writers" section. I've authored a lot of wiki articles and I've never consider myself a writer.
• Wiki ToDo
  • Again, this should be front-row and center, but it's much more than the wiki. Uros fixed a bunch of source files with the old software name in it and that helps the project quite a bit. I would suggest we just add what's missing from the getting-invovled page and then remove that.

I really don't mind redundancy, but I think we should avoid it because it makes things dated and harder to maintain. Anything that has a GitHub or website equivalent, I vote we move it, hotlink it or whatever. I don't want our wiki page to be a portal to our stuff, we already have one of those. :)

-Tres

[Spekular]

Should I empty and mark for deletion the "news" and "contact" pages?

[tresf]

Should I empty and mark for deletion the "news" and "contact" pages?

IIRC, @Sti2nd is our unofficial, official maintainer 😸 right now. Please coordinate with him.

[Sti2nd]

• Well, if the wiki get a lot of contributors it would be a nice place to coordinate cause you can't really communicate there (at least not with the current version). Only need for wiki news now is that you can see what the latest version of LMMS is, but that could be a link to the download page on lmms.io instead. So rename the section "Latest release" perhaps?
• Contact page, no, now we can redirect (I am thinking linking directly if it doesn't cause too much harm) to lmms.io, the same goes for the community portal. The wiki was a better and accessible portal than the old home page before, now lmms.io has made the portal articles redundant.
• Tip of the day has never been a good page. I am planning on rewriting/replacing all of it as I have almost all of it covered with LMMS TIPS. Could possibly rename the page to Tips & Tricks or just delete it and create a new.
  ** I don't think FAQ and Tips & tricks has so much to do with each other as it is written now. FAQ is general information about the program, like setup, settings, capabilities, legal. Some questions under the Usage section are exceptions to this, though. These could be removed, but I have added some of them myself, I think, because people on FB asks about them all the time so I wrote them there to relieve the traffic. I think the FAQ page does a job being a mini summary of the wiki with the most popular information.
• Troubleshooting someone should definitely look at, could perhaps link to github instead if those pages includes the same information?
• Artist documentation, rename to graphical (artist) documentation?
  ** Yes, themeing is what people are looking for, so should be on front page.
• I am not sure about the writer section. It was really useful for me to begin with, when I always forgot the syntax from time to time.
• ToDo. By front row and center I thought you meant first page? Could possibly be there under Community section... should probably be renamed to something else, I mean community?

PS: Lucas W is the only one who holds admin right (if that old version of MediaWiki has such functionality) or the only one with access to the code, at least.

[lukas-w]

If you visit http://lmms.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Special:ListGroupRights, you'll see there's an "admin" and an "Administrator" group. I'm in the latter. Only the "admin" group can change user rights though, so unfortunately I can't give any one more permissions without hacking the database.

[Sti2nd]

WTF. Is SF the admin or something?

[Sti2nd]

Can't reach the page on mobile, you see.

[tresf]

So rename the section "Latest release" perhaps?

But why? What is the purpose of making a link to our software when browsing it from a site with a dedicated download toolbar button? It's like putting a link to the wiki on the download page... what is the end goal? :)

Artist documentation, rename to graphical (artist) documentation? ** Yes, themeing is what people are looking for, so should be on front page.

I would vote "Themes / Graphics". I vote we don't put the person's title in there with this stuff... It's confusing... It's like putting the word "Dish washers" over a pile of scrub brushes. It's not inaccurate, but it is certainly misleading.

I am not sure about the writer section. It was really useful for me to begin with, when I always forgot the syntax from time to time.

I'm not saying it should be removed, I'm just questioning it's importance as a page maintained by us and specific to us. If a 3rd party has some help on this, can't we link to them?

The rest sounds like you already have objectives with it. You are right, most of this stuff was perfectly acceptable with our old site due to the fragmentation of content and lack of collaboration. Now we have a quick and easy process for updating our site content and we should really trim the fat off of the process. The wiki is now integrated (even more so when Lukas is finished with cleaning the URLs) and that really goes towards branding our site and our product. (good work thus far).

-Tres

[Umcaruje]

I'd really like to volunteer as a Wiki Maintainer. I've already fixed a bunch of stuff, and would like to continue to do so. The main problem is that we now have a lot of pages that need deleting, and there isn't anyone there to delete them. Also, making a search filter to exclude 0.3 and 0.4 related pages from search is necessary IMO, because almost all of those pages have broken images and translation templates.

If you visit http://lmms.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Special:ListGroupRights, you'll see there's an "admin" and an "Administrator" group. I'm in the latter. Only the "admin" group can change user rights, so unfortunately I can't give any one more permissions without hacking the database.

Then perhaps @tobydox or @pgiblock could help us out, and provide @Sti2nd (and perhaps myself) with administrator rights :)

[tresf]

Just realized this is a duplicate of #57. Sorry for redundancies...

[tresf]

also, making a search filter to exclude 0.3 and 0.4 related pages from search is necessary IMO, because almost all of those pages have broken images and translation templates.

We don't have a search option anymore, is this request still valid? Or do we make our own search option which fixes this from our end?

[Umcaruje]

We don't have a search option anymore, is this request still valid? Or do we make our own search option which fixes this from our end?

A search option would be most definitely very useful.

[tresf]

I vote video tutorials make it to our front page too. They are way too hard to find and offer a tremendous amount of value to our users.

[Sti2nd]

What do you mean? http://lmms.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

We don't have a search option anymore

The implementation of the wiki into lmms.io as of 19:45 is barely enough for reading it, so yes that implementation lacks key functionality, like search and be able to render tables http://lmms.io/documentation/?page=Video_tutorials ^
Anything else than reading; editing, searching, and view the articles with table lines I thought we had to do at the old link?

[Sti2nd]

And Uros, you are already hired, Tres just tagged someone.

[Umcaruje]

Ok well, if @Sti2nd agrees I'd now restructure the main page. My proposal:

Documentation	Guides	Community	Tip of the day (remove News feed)
Getting Started	Requirements	Developers
Manual (wiki only) I'd vote that we remove the PDF manual, since its outdated completely (Its for LMMS 0.4.12)	Troubleshooting	Wiki ToDo
User FAQ	How to report bugs	Writing guidelines
Video Tutorials (replaces Tip of the Day)		Theming guide
VST Database
Useful resources			This'd require some hackery.

[tresf]

The implementation of the wiki into lmms.io as of 19:45 is barely enough for reading it

That is quite the exaggeration. :) The majority of it renders quite nicely from what I can see.

What do you mean? http://lmms.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

People (hopefully) won't go there to view it. We redirect site traffic away from sourceforge now. We spent a long time doing this and we left plenty of opportunity for objections, so the way it is now is likely to remain for a while (unless we figure out a better way).

I'd vote that we remove the PDF manual, since its outdated completely (Its for LMMS 0.4.12)

But 90% of it is still identical to the way the software functions. We just clearly state the version in the software and let people do as they wish. If you were to teach LMMS in an institution but lacked the resources necessary to buy the Packt Publishing book, this manual would be what is printed and distributed to your students (and they would likely download 0.4.15 to keep the lesson consistent with the publication). I don't think its fair to remove a tremendously valuable piece of publishing because the software decided to rebrand itself, although I may be alone with this opinion.

I also think our users may want to jump to some new/frequently asked about topics... Perhaps our latest instruments can have a link on the front page for a while, which will also invite the user to the instruments section.

[Sti2nd]

Important @tresf @lukas-w : You sure it is in the accordance with the licence to exclude the licence information in the bottom bar.

The majority of it renders quite nicely from what I can see.

Well, for reformatting it on lmms.io you have done a nice job :) And you sure it wouldn't be easier to just use an iframe?

[Umcaruje]

But 90% of it is still identical to the way the software functions. We just clearly state the version in the software and let people do as they wish. If you were to teach LMMS in an institution but lacked the resources necessary to buy the Packt Publishing book, this manual would be what is printed and distributed to your students (and they would likely download 0.4.15 to keep the lesson consistent with the publication). I don't think its fair to remove a tremendously valuable piece of publishing because the software decided to rebrand itself, although I may be alone with this opinion.

Well, to be honest, the PDF manual is what I have read when I first started using LMMS. I do get your points and perhaps we shouldn't remove the PDF manual. I'd really like to see if the author of the PDF Manual is active and if he is willing to update the manual to the 1.X series, or just perhaps share just the source file (PDF is tough to edit) for the community to update it.
I do want to state that I think the PDF manual is actually more consistent and better written than the wiki, mostly because it was written by one person (AFAIK).
I thought that the PDF Manual can confuse new users, because its obsolete. That's why I suggested removing it. But with proper stating of the version, the obsolence would not make a problem.

[tresf]

And you sure it wouldn't be easier to just use an iframe?

Why would you curse at me?

[tresf]

:)

[Sti2nd]

Curse? Ehhh, wasn't intended, was a question :-)

[tresf]

Curse? Ehhh, wasn't intended, was a question :-)

iframe is a curse word in web development. You should know that by now!

[tresf]

Merging with #57. Put @Umcaruje's notes in the original report. Copy over your own if you're afraid of them being lost. Please feel free to strikeout stuff if you feel it's already been taken care of!

[tresf]

So I know this is a work in progress, but can we prioritize the removal of these old SF links? (I vote we just remove the news section altogether).

[Sti2nd]

I want to understand the proposal Uros made, reading it now, again. Does this table makes sense?
OK I got it! Wasn't that hard.

So Uros, the article about troubleshooting isn't needed because the FAQ could have (already have some) a troubleshooting section, good call.

• I don't think you can remove the link to the writer section and artist section, how are one supposed to find your way around then? Agree on adding more links.
• Nice idea to have that "tip of the day" function!!!!!!!!!!!!!
• Ok to remove the wiki news entirely, most people will probably browse from lmms.io, which brings me to. How do I log into the io wiki? I mean, you can't navigate to it from io?

[Umcaruje]

Well, I wanted to replace the news tab with a tip of the day function. This extension: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Bashfr or this one: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:RandomText would work.

P.S. @lukas-w the page duplicator got removed due the transition from SF to NetworkRedux. Could you explain to me how I can install some extensions to the wiki? I don't want to waste your time whenever I want to add a useful extension.

[Umcaruje]

The wiki has been updated to version 1.24.1 and pages are being replaced - 1.0:Manual will now become Manual etc.

[tresf]

👍

[Umcaruje]

@lukas-w I want to set up the wiki to use this skin: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Skin:Chameleon

Can you explain how I could add it to our current Composer setup?

[tresf]

@Umcaruje, is it set up locally already?

[Umcaruje]

Ok, so wiki now uses Font Awesome. I added a few templates: https://lmms.io/wiki/index.php?title=Templates#Font_Awesome for easy access. Say hi to the new Main page:

[tresf]

Very nice!

Can we remove the links to the home page and forum now? Also, not sure how to fix this, but the tile "Main Page" is misleading, it should probably say something about Documentation or Wiki (eventually at least).

[tresf]

Also, this redirect link is broken:

https://lmms.io/documentation/1.0:Getting_Started

[Umcaruje]

Also, this redirect link is broken:

https://lmms.io/documentation/1.0:Getting_Started

Can a global recache be done? (@lukas-w) It seems as some pages cached while others were moving, so these broken links are the result of that.

Can we remove the links to the home page and forum now? Also, not sure how to fix this, but the tile "Main Page" is misleading, it should probably say something about Documentation or Wiki

Removed the links, I am not comfortable with changing the Main Page name yet, I have to do some investigation first :)

[tresf]

I am not comfortable with changing the Main Page name yet, I have to do some investigation first :)

Yeah I agree... Perhaps we tackle this on the delivery side only... @lukas-w shall we put a custom title on the twig side of our wiki pages which represent that they are Documentation/Wiki?

[Umcaruje]

shall we put a custom title on the twig side of our wiki pages which represent that they are Documentation/Wiki?

Or I can remove the tittle and add a custom Heading :), I think that is the most painless solution.

[tresf]

Or I can remove the tittle and add a custom Heading :), I think that is the most painless solution.

Ok... I just don't want to muck up the way it looks in the actual Wiki instance, but you'd be a better judge of that.

[Sti2nd]

Also, this redirect link is broken: https://lmms.io/documentation/1.0:Getting_Started

Where did you find that? Can reproduce by pasting the link, but not through any Getting Started link on lmms.io/documentation

[tresf]

Where did you find that?

Old URL, which was promised to work after page renames (i.e. standard testing )

[Sti2nd]

Oh, now I get it, you cannot click it either. It goes to https://lmms.io/documentation/Getting_Started&redirect=no which should go to https://lmms.io/documentation/Getting_Started

[Umcaruje]

Well that's something in the RemWiki.php I don't know how to fix it

[Sti2nd]

Remove &redirect=no ? Haha, such joke

[Umcaruje]

Ok... I just don't want to muck up the way it looks in the actual Wiki instance, but you'd be a better judge of that.

I actually found a really clean way of doing it: change $wgRestrictDisplayTitle to false and use {{DISPLAYTITLE:<span>LMMS Wiki</span>}} to change the tittle without the need to move the page.

http://lmms.io/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

[tresf]

Very cool!

<span>Not too bad</span>

Take out LMMS please tho. And for consistency purposes, perhaps we just use "Documentation" ? :) Oh yeah, and can we fix the span tags? :)

[Umcaruje]

Done.

[tresf]

👍

[lukas-w]

Can a global recache be done?

Yes, removing all files in /tmp/wiki/ via SSH should do the trick.

[lukas-w]

The https://lmms.io/documentation/Getting_Started&redirect=no showing a blank page problem looks like a bug in the documentationPage($page) function in views.php. My guess is that the &redirect=no part is not being stripped and the script therefore looks for a page called Getting_Started&redirect=no.

Edit: Oh wait, the link shouldn't even say &redirect=no in the first place, it should be ?redirect=no...

[tresf]

These troubleshooting steps really need to be cleaned up. I see stuff in there from 0.3.0. @mikobuntu @Umcaruje @softrabbit can we debunk/move this to the GitHub wiki section because these don't really seem to be common end-user troubleshooting steps and I'm not sure the GDB steps offer that much when using a standard build, right?

https://lmms.io/wiki/index.php?title=Troubleshooting

[Umcaruje]

Just a 'lil update on this: I edited the original post and turned it into a task list.

As for the articles, all of them are transferred now. So there is no longer a page named 1.0:Getting Started, now its just Getting Started. That means that we don't have to duplicate all the pages and create new manuals for 1.1, 1.2 etc. but to simply update the current pages when that's needed.

[tresf]

All items appear to have been addressed. Thanks! Closing.