Moin 2.0 (or as I call it, mediawiki)

[Mike McGrath]

So I spent some time last night and produced this:

https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain

It's worth noting that the upgrade from Moin1.5.8 -> Moin 1.6.1 took
longer then going from Moin 1.5.8 to the mediawiki install above.  There's
still some work to be done (especially a theme).  But I think the
conversion to mediawiki is much closer to us now then ever before if we
decide to go this route.

So.

Question 1, do we want to try this conversion?

Question 2, Who is willing to take orders from me with regards to getting
a new template done?  (by orders I basically just mean do this, this is
broken, this header didn't come out, we need a css fix here).  Just
something functional so it can be presented to the rest of the project and
ultimately redesigned for a crisp look and feel?

Question 3, I did a brief look, there's a lot of stuff that's broken,
mostly tables.  Does anyone see anything that came out completely
un-recognized?  I'm especially referring to the translated pages.

This is a very rough conversion, but it did convert, most of the text is
there, formatting needs work.  I'm still working on the script so send any
suggestions / comments my way.

	-Mike

[Thomas Chung]

On Feb 8, 2008 11:33 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>
>  https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>
>  It's worth noting that the upgrade from Moin1.5.8 -> Moin 1.6.1 took
>  longer then going from Moin 1.5.8 to the mediawiki install above.  There's
>  still some work to be done (especially a theme).  But I think the
>  conversion to mediawiki is much closer to us now then ever before if we
>  decide to go this route.
>
>  So.
>
>  Question 1, do we want to try this conversion?
>
>  Question 2, Who is willing to take orders from me with regards to getting
>  a new template done?  (by orders I basically just mean do this, this is
>  broken, this header didn't come out, we need a css fix here).  Just
>  something functional so it can be presented to the rest of the project and
>  ultimately redesigned for a crisp look and feel?
>
>  Question 3, I did a brief look, there's a lot of stuff that's broken,
>  mostly tables.  Does anyone see anything that came out completely
>  un-recognized?  I'm especially referring to the translated pages.
>
>  This is a very rough conversion, but it did convert, most of the text is
>  there, formatting needs work.  I'm still working on the script so send any
>  suggestions / comments my way.
>
>          -Mike 
Here is my two cents for Moin vs MediaWiki.
I don't mind migration to MediaWiki since I'm alread familar with it.
However, MediaWiki requires MySQL database so it's a bit complex than Moin.
I'm currently in the process of migration fedoranews.org to new server and
encounting some issues with exporting and importing database.
Anyway, that's my two cents. :)

Regards,
-- 
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung

[John Poelstra]

Mike McGrath said the following on 02/08/2008 11:33 AM Pacific Time:
>  So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  
>  https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>  
>  It's worth noting that the upgrade from Moin1.5.8 -> Moin 1.6.1 took
>  longer then going from Moin 1.5.8 to the mediawiki install above.  There's
>  still some work to be done (especially a theme).  But I think the
>  conversion to mediawiki is much closer to us now then ever before if we
>  decide to go this route.
>  
>  So.
>  
>  Question 1, do we want to try this conversion? 
YES!!!

>  Question 2, Who is willing to take orders from me with regards to
> getting
>  a new template done?  (by orders I basically just mean do this, this is
>  broken, this header didn't come out, we need a css fix here).  Just
>  something functional so it can be presented to the rest of the project and
>  ultimately redesigned for a crisp look and feel?
>  
>  Question 3, I did a brief look, there's a lot of stuff that's broken,
>  mostly tables.  Does anyone see anything that came out completely
>  un-recognized?  I'm especially referring to the translated pages. 
Is it possible to login?  I tried with my existing wiki and FAS 
user/passwd, but it didn't work.

Trying to edit a page (w/o being able to login) gave me this error message:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No such section
 From FedoraProject
Jump to: navigation, search

You tried to edit a section that doesn't exist. Since there is no 
section 3, there's no place to save your edit.

Return to Main Page.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Mike McGrath]

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, John Poelstra wrote:

>  Mike McGrath said the following on 02/08/2008 11:33 AM Pacific Time:
>  > So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  >
>  > https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>  >
>  > It's worth noting that the upgrade from Moin1.5.8 -> Moin 1.6.1 took
>  > longer then going from Moin 1.5.8 to the mediawiki install above.  There's
>  > still some work to be done (especially a theme).  But I think the
>  > conversion to mediawiki is much closer to us now then ever before if we
>  > decide to go this route.
>  >
>  > So.
>  >
>  > Question 1, do we want to try this conversion?
>
>  YES!!!
>
>  > Question 2, Who is willing to take orders from me with regards to getting
>  > a new template done?  (by orders I basically just mean do this, this is
>  > broken, this header didn't come out, we need a css fix here).  Just
>  > something functional so it can be presented to the rest of the project and
>  > ultimately redesigned for a crisp look and feel?
>  >
>  > Question 3, I did a brief look, there's a lot of stuff that's broken,
>  > mostly tables.  Does anyone see anything that came out completely
>  > un-recognized?  I'm especially referring to the translated pages.
>
>  Is it possible to login?  I tried with my existing wiki and FAS user/passwd,
>  but it didn't work.
>
>  Trying to edit a page (w/o being able to login) gave me this error message: 
There are options here, right now no tie-in exists though I'd like to have
no users in the wiki at all and make everyone use FAS.  This is much more
feasible with mediawiki then with moin.

	-Mike

[Jon Stanley]

On Feb 8, 2008 3:55 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  There are options here, right now no tie-in exists though I'd
> like to have
>  no users in the wiki at all and make everyone use FAS.  This is much more
>  feasible with mediawiki then with moin. 
+100 for mediawiki then :)

Another one that I really like that we use internally at work (not
free as in speech or beer, though :( ) is Atlassian Confluence.
They've done great work, but they're greedy :(

[Seth Vidal]

On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 16:33 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
>  On Feb 8, 2008 3:55 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt;
> wrote:
>  
>  > There are options here, right now no tie-in exists though I'd like to have
>  > no users in the wiki at all and make everyone use FAS.  This is much more
>  > feasible with mediawiki then with moin.
>  
>  +100 for mediawiki then :)
>  
>  Another one that I really like that we use internally at work (not
>  free as in speech or beer, though :( ) is Atlassian Confluence.
>  They've done great work, but they're greedy :( 
Closed source software is, of course, a non-starter in fedora.

And my personal experience with confluence was that it does not scale
well at all.

-sv

-- 
I only speak for me.

[Ramez Hanna]

On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 16:39 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
>  On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 16:33 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
>  > On Feb 8, 2008 3:55 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > 
>  > > There are options here, right now no tie-in exists though I'd like to have
>  > > no users in the wiki at all and make everyone use FAS.  This is much more
>  > > feasible with mediawiki then with moin.
>  > 
>  > +100 for mediawiki then :)
>  > 
>  > Another one that I really like that we use internally at work (not
>  > free as in speech or beer, though :( ) is Atlassian Confluence.
>  > They've done great work, but they're greedy :(
>  
>  Closed source software is, of course, a non-starter in fedora.
>  
>  And my personal experience with confluence was that it does not scale
>  well at all.
>  
>  -sv
>   
and very resource hungry
--
ramez hanna

[Jeffrey Tadlock]

On Feb 8, 2008 3:55 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  There are options here, right now no tie-in exists though I'd
> like to have
>  no users in the wiki at all and make everyone use FAS.  This is much more
>  feasible with mediawiki then with moin. 
I have not used it, but moin does appear to have an option to use LDAP
on the backend.

http://moinmo.in/HelpOnAuthentication/LDAP

If the a move to mediawiki is not agreed on or is determined to be too
disruptive to the community in general, the above may be an option.

--Jeffrey

[Till Maas]

On Sun February 10 2008, Jeffrey Tadlock wrote:
>  On Feb 8, 2008 3:55 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt;
> wrote:
>  > There are options here, right now no tie-in exists though I'd like to
>  > have no users in the wiki at all and make everyone use FAS.  This is much
>  > more feasible with mediawiki then with moin.
>
>  I have not used it, but moin does appear to have an option to use LDAP
>  on the backend.
>
>  http://moinmo.in/HelpOnAuthentication/LDAP
>
>  If the a move to mediawiki is not agreed on or is determined to be too
>  disruptive to the community in general, the above may be an option. 
Both wikis also support SSL client certificate authentication, which should be 
supported by FAS, because koji already uses it. This would also secure the 
wiki against attacks that target the moin authentication cookie, because then 
no cookie would be used.

Regards,
Till

[Mike McLean]

Mike McGrath wrote:
>  So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  
>  https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain 
Are the mediawiki access controls sufficient for our needs? iirc they 
are pretty limited compared to moin's, but I'm not sure to what extent 
we're using them.

[Mike McGrath]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Mike McLean wrote:

>  Mike McGrath wrote:
>  > So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  >
>  > https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>
>  Are the mediawiki access controls sufficient for our needs? iirc they are
>  pretty limited compared to moin's, but I'm not sure to what extent we're
> using
>  them.
>  
That is an area we will see a change.  There is an acl framework I've got
setup on the test wiki.  Moins is more self-service then mediawiki's for
sure.  I'm trying to figure out how to make it more self service then it
is but I think even at its current state it will suit our needs by making
some pages read-only for people and making others non-public.

I guess it serves us right for doing such things to a "wiki".

	-Mike

[James Laska]

Mike McGrath wrote:
>  So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  
>  https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain 
My apologies ... I'm not tremendously familiar yet with mediawiki 
editing yet.  Is similar Macro functionality available (e.g. Include())?

I recall quaid indicating this in the past, but export as docbook is 
available?

Thanks,
James

-- 
==========================================
  James Laska         -- jlaska(a)redhat.com
  Quality Engineering -- Red Hat, Inc.
==========================================

[Jeffrey Ollie]

On 2/12/08, James Laska <jlaska(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Mike McGrath wrote:
>  > So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  >
>  > https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>
>  My apologies ... I'm not tremendously familiar yet with mediawiki
>  editing yet.  Is similar Macro functionality available (e.g. Include())? 
Yes:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Advanced_editing#Including_another_pa...

It's also very easy to create your own plugins - I've done several
small ones for an internal wiki.

>  I recall quaid indicating this in the past, but export as docbook is
>  available? 
> From what I can tell the state of exporting docbook from MediaWiki
isn't very good.  Perhaps that would make a good GSoC for someone.  I
don't know if we'd want to run two wikis, but what about using
DocBookWiki for editing the docs?

http://doc-book.sourceforge.net/homepage/

Jeff

[Ville-Pekka Vainio]

Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> From what I can tell the state of exporting docbook from MediaWiki
>  isn't very good.  Perhaps that would make a good GSoC for someone.  I
>  don't know if we'd want to run two wikis, but what about using
>  DocBookWiki for editing the docs?
>
>  http://doc-book.sourceforge.net/homepage/ 
Will the Docs Project need the wiki for writing documentation if we will soon 
have the new Docs platform that DaMaestro is working on? If they still will, 
then there's one thing to take into account: Fedora already had a GSoC 
project which improved Moin's DocBook exporting support 
<http://hg.moinmo.in/moin/1.6-docbook-mvirkkil/>;.

We haven't been very successful in getting our code into upstream and in this 
case they would want a maintainer for that code as well before merging it. 
Nobody has stepped up to do it, but still migrating to MediaWiki might cause 
us losing the work of one GSoC project and having to set up another doing 
basically a lot of the same work on a different platform.

(I'm not saying we absolutely shouldn't migrate to MediaWiki - and the 
decision isn't mine to make anyway - but I just wanted to mention this as it 
came up in the discussion.)

-- 
Ville-Pekka Vainio

[Mike McGrath]

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Mike McGrath wrote:

>  So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>
>  https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>
>  It's worth noting that the upgrade from Moin1.5.8 -> Moin 1.6.1 took
>  longer then going from Moin 1.5.8 to the mediawiki install above.  There's
>  still some work to be done (especially a theme).  But I think the
>  conversion to mediawiki is much closer to us now then ever before if we
>  decide to go this route.
>
>  So.
>
>  Question 1, do we want to try this conversion?
>  
For those that missed the meeting, this was discussed.  It was determined
that the infrastructure team wants to migrate.  I'll be contacting all the
individual teams to make sure they're fine with it, what features they'll
want and we'll see about making it happen.

	-Mike

[Anand Capur]

On 2/15/08, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
>  > So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  >
>  > https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>  >
>  > It's worth noting that the upgrade from Moin1.5.8 -> Moin 1.6.1 took
>  > longer then going from Moin 1.5.8 to the mediawiki install
>  above.  There's
>  > still some work to be done (especially a theme).  But I think the
>  > conversion to mediawiki is much closer to us now then ever before if we
>  > decide to go this route.
>  >
>  > So.
>  >
>  > Question 1, do we want to try this conversion?
>  >
>
>  For those that missed the meeting, this was discussed.  It was determined
>  that the infrastructure team wants to migrate.  I'll be contacting all the
>  individual teams to make sure they're fine with it, what features they'll
>  want and we'll see about making it happen.
>
>          -Mike 

With the move to mediawiki, would we want to try and integrate a FAS2
authentication system?  I know that mediawiki supports LDAP authentication
with some extension.
-Anand

[Paulo Santos]

I think this would be one of the objectives, yes.

2008/2/16 Anand Capur <admin(a)arcnetworks.biz&gt;:

>  On 2/15/08, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>
>  > On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Mike McGrath wrote:
>  >
>  > > So I spent some time last night and produced this:
>  > >
>  > > https://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/wiki/index.php/FedoraMain
>  > >
>  > > It's worth noting that the upgrade from Moin1.5.8 -> Moin 1.6.1 took
>  > > longer then going from Moin 1.5.8 to the mediawiki install
>  > above.  There's
>  > > still some work to be done (especially a theme).  But I think the
>  > > conversion to mediawiki is much closer to us now then ever before if
>  > we
>  > > decide to go this route.
>  > >
>  > > So.
>  > >
>  > > Question 1, do we want to try this conversion?
>  > >
>  >
>  > For those that missed the meeting, this was discussed.  It was
>  > determined
>  > that the infrastructure team wants to migrate.  I'll be contacting all
>  > the
>  > individual teams to make sure they're fine with it, what features
>  > they'll
>  > want and we'll see about making it happen.
>  >
>  >         -Mike
>
>
>  With the move to mediawiki, would we want to try and integrate a FAS2
>  authentication system?  I know that mediawiki supports LDAP authentication
>  with some extension.
>  -Anand
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
>  Fedora-infrastructure-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
>
>