New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Community run wiki #9
Comments
Something something fossil |
I agree that a separate wiki would be the right thing to do, but IMO we should follow kisslinux.org's way of doing it. This would also give us (hypotethically) the opportunity to put the wiki's files into /usr/share/doc/kiss (or just put them into their respective package) and let |
It could certainly be a separate |
@Riteo, I've also considered that option. But how would people contribute / add their own wiki pages? kisslinux.org's wiki works well because Dylan is pretty much the only person contributing to it, but I'm not sure if that system would scale well with a lot more wiki pages and a lot more wiki page maintainers. |
@dilyn-corner that isn't a bad idea, but IMO we shouldn't immediately discard the idea of putting the documentation inside every package like |
@AndreiSva every wiki page is just a file, I don't see why this shouldn't scale. If the issue is just updating the index then maybe we could make some script that builds it for us? It would still be lighter than a full-fledged mediawiki instance or something similar. |
I'm certainly not opposed to people putting README's in their package's folder, but what I meant by
is that the package installs all of the wiki documents to the requisite location in |
@dilyn-corner oh right, I forgot about the use case of non package-specific documentation, my bad. In that case IMO the best option would be to put the package documentation inside each package, while creating that |
+1 to putting non-package-specific stuff in |
I would like to add a The next-best heuristic could be warning if all of the following files are missing (assuming that if they exist, build script installs them)
|
And of course, if these files become 'standard' we can have a script that collates them all into a 'static' wiki, like dylan does for the regular kiss site |
Thinking about it now having the wiki page in READMEs inside the repository would be amazing! It would be a lot simpler and "KISS" than running a fully fledged MediaWiki instance but it would also allow for offline documentation! I love it |
@ArmaanB and I have set up a community wiki system, live at https://kisscommunity.bvnf.space. A page for If I know you well enough, drop me a message and I can give you push access to the repo on my server. Otherwise, you are welcome to open a pull request here, which I will merge manually (this repo on GitHub is just a mirror), or send me a patch via email. Note: if you want to add a patch to smu, that's fine, just let me know before pushing because it won't apply automatically. |
We have so many packages in the community repository that it's getting hard to keep track of them. Not to mention that some of them require specific post-install steps to be taken by the user which currently are not really documented anywhere.
I've previously tried starting a wiki in this repository's
Wiki
tab, but I don't think hosting it on Github is a good idea for multiple reasons:Discoverability
It's very difficult to find out about the existence wiki since it's hidden in a small tab in the website's repository, which not many people will ever visit. Even if there's a link added to the main page of kisscommunity.org about the wiki, it will mean redirecting the user to a different website which is a bad user experience.
Github's wiki system sucks
As of the writing of this issue, there are currently 401 packages in the community repository. While Github's wiki system might be fine for small wikis with only a handful of pages, Github wikis tend to be slow to navigate and cumbersome with a large number of pages.
Hosting a separate wiki service like MediaWiki allows for more control
Hosting our own wiki service would allow a much higher degree of control over who edits pages and how the wiki is set up in general. Furthermore, it has the potential to integrate perfectly with the rest of the community website and would give the opportunity of people without a Github account to contribute.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: