From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14E3B7F2AA for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 03:50:07 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of agarwal1975@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.223.171; receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="agarwal1975@gmail.com"; x-sender="agarwal1975@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of agarwal1975@gmail.com designates 209.85.223.171 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.223.171; receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="agarwal1975@gmail.com"; x-sender="agarwal1975@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-ie0-f171.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.223.171; receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="agarwal1975@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-ie0-f171.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuMBALrN01DRVd+rm2dsb2JhbABFqyQziQsBiQYIFg4BAQEBAQgJCwkUJ4IeAQEEAUABGxILAQMBCwYFCw0NISEBAREBBQEKEgYTEgKHbAEDCQYMmGiMM4J7hRMKGScDClmIdgEFDIthaoRDA4hii1OBVoEcihsCgy8WKYQz X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,327,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="166478504" Received: from mail-ie0-f171.google.com ([209.85.223.171]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 21 Dec 2012 03:50:05 +0100 Received: by mail-ie0-f171.google.com with SMTP id 17so5557306iea.16 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:50:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=AW9eYEK4NtUOVkfAq83a+bdofLowvY032KcgnIDMRyQ=; b=ZRKKObz5JdGFTyu9vgupBArRziAYcKJjDf6a0zAA6c9slW9x57rMFxBo5wij/KfX/o lxoDQgrU+10k3lpL5Wc+8p5G6ioc0nONbTybKMga2KHrhm8ca0KS7/5b70uec92TPtW0 Io84KC1YmiIfpl0wKaUNxqBMXQZTFwoj/WKvwfA+WMSuxKjN7SeV0lINGnrydkG5xAaa updaSXvqh7bpqSZux1wD0EspP//cgHrLqgLQjZpNYtjqyU904+Vk+VLs/aaP3HN2CBgN njwYUPt4qsjvPZmUp20I9pf5yCdK20IX6D39edmON0F4mKIBPQpSW11xAsEwsaE5J52Q WjvQ== Received: by 10.50.40.133 with SMTP id x5mr12266935igk.32.1356058204444; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:50:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.47.229 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:49:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <6A2113E2-2202-46EA-B0B0-7C80AA25B480@recoil.org> <88F05F0A-10A2-47AF-8285-575E95797E54@recoil.org> From: Ashish Agarwal Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:49:44 -0500 Message-ID: To: Wojciech Meyer Cc: Anil Madhavapeddy , Benedikt Meurer , caml-list@inria.fr Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93403d9921a5004d153e73a Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml wiki --14dae93403d9921a5004d153e73a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 A wiki could be good but I strongly encourage any such effort to integrate with ocaml.org, and to carefully weigh the pros and cons. Wikis make contributions easier, but you need someone to keep the content organized and do some basic quality control. Also, the structure of the documentation is not very customizable. The question is whether pushing to a git repo (the current contribution method for ocaml.org) is so much harder (given that we're all programmers after all). The tutorials page is a good candidate for converting to wiki format, but remember that a wiki is where all this content came from, and it eventually got out of date. We could create wiki.ocaml.org, but then the question is how to make it integrate nicely with the rest of the pages that don't fit the wiki model. Finally, which wiki software to use? None are very good, and who amongst us is keen to hack into php code. My initial goal for ocaml.org was to use ocsigen and ocsimore, but there is a big upfront cost in getting such a site implemented. Whatever the community decides, we can support and integrate with ocaml.org. My only strong opinion is please don't build a separate unrelated site, with duplication of effort and and fragmentation of content. On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Wojciech Meyer wrote: > Anil Madhavapeddy writes: > > > On 20 Dec 2012, at 23:31, Benedikt Meurer < > benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Dec 21, 2012, at 0:22 , Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: > >> > >>> Personally, I've got mixed feelings about wikis from experience with > >>> previous projects, since they get out of date very rapidly indeed. They > >>> do work well if someone's maintaining it, but if that's the case, why > >>> not just push these tips and guides to the existing ocaml.org site? > >>> > >>> I'm happy to run a wiki on the OCL infrastructure, but would strongly > >>> prefer contributions to the ocaml.org Git repo with all this good > stuff > >>> instead! If it really turns out we need a swanky wiki, that can be > arranged > >>> later... > >> > >> Why not use the wiki provided by Github for the ocaml.org project? > > > > That works too; Thomas has written a Github Markdown to HTML converter in > > COW [1], and is using that to generate the OPAM website from the Github > > wiki (for the documentation that you see on opam.ocamlpro.com). > > Yes, we could use github pages as long as they are searchable, I see no > problem with it. I think the biggest advantage of wiki would be that > everything would be in single place and hyperlinked. > > As for protecting the wiki from being up-date emacswiki [1] is always a > great example that it is possible as long as people maintain their > webpages. Also, I feel that ocaml.org pages on github would be a good > entry point. > > [1] http://emacswiki.org/ > > -Wojciech > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs > --14dae93403d9921a5004d153e73a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A wiki could be good but I strongly encourage any such effort to integrate = with ocaml.org, and to carefully weigh the= pros and cons. Wikis make contributions easier, but you need someone to ke= ep the content organized and do some basic quality control. Also, the struc= ture of the documentation is not very customizable. The question is whether= pushing to a git repo (the current contribution method for ocaml.org) is so much harder (given that we're all pr= ogrammers after all).

The tutorials page is a good candidate for converting to wik= i format, but remember that a wiki is where all this content came from, and= it eventually got out of date. We could create wiki.ocaml.org, but then the question is how to make it integrat= e nicely with the rest of the pages that don't fit the wiki model.

Finally, which wiki software to use? None are very good= , and who amongst us is keen to hack into php code. My initial goal for ocaml.org was to use ocsigen and ocsimore, bu= t there is a big upfront cost in getting such a site implemented.

Whatever the community decides, we can support and inte= grate with ocaml.org. My only strong opini= on is please don't build a separate unrelated site, with duplication of= effort and and fragmentation of content.


On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at = 6:50 PM, Wojciech Meyer <wojciech.meyer@gmail.com> wr= ote:
Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@recoil.org> writes:

> On 20 Dec 2012, at 23:31, Benedikt Meurer <benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 21, 2012, at 0:22 , Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@recoil.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Personally, I've got mixed feelings about wikis from exper= ience with
>>> previous projects, since they get out of date very rapidly ind= eed. They
>>> do work well if someone's maintaining it, but if that'= s the case, why
>>> not just push these tips and guides to the existing ocaml.org site?
>>>
>>> I'm happy to run a wiki on the OCL infrastructure, but wou= ld strongly
>>> prefer contributions to the ocaml.org Git repo with all this good stuff
>>> instead! =A0If it really turns out we need a swanky wiki, that= can be arranged
>>> later...
>>
>> Why not use the wiki provided by Github for the ocaml.org project?
>
> That works too; Thomas has written a Github Markdown to HTML converter= in
> COW [1], and is using that to generate the OPAM website from the Githu= b
> wiki (for the documentation that you see on opam.ocamlpro.com).

Yes, we could use github pages as long as they are searchable, I see = no
problem with it. I think the biggest advantage of wiki would be that
everything would be in single place and hyperlinked.

As for protecting the wiki from being up-date emacswiki [1] is always a
great example that it is possible as long as people maintain their
webpages. Also, I feel that = ocaml.org pages on github would be a good
entry point.

[1] http://emacswiki.or= g/

-Wojciech

--
Caml-list mailing list. =A0Subscription management and archives:
ht= tps://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs

--14dae93403d9921a5004d153e73a--