Good News, everybody! Maybe not yet, though :) There are two things I'd like to get at with this mail. a) This also has something to do with Ned's mails from yesterday - we have two FAQs at the moment (on www.centos.org and on wiki.centos.org) and we want to unify those, if possible on the wiki. The one feature the www version has and the wiki one doesn't is comments - and we really want to have that. So I went ahead and installed the PageComment2 plugin on the development version of the wiki, which allows you to anonymously comment on wiki pages. To minimize spam, I enabled the "global antispam feature" of the wiki, which checks every save against the list at <http://master.moinmo.in/BadContent>. This also is enabled on the real wiki, which means that saving articles might take a bit longer at the moment. I'd like to ask those of you who are in <http://wiki-m.centos.org/EditGroup> to toy around a bit with the comment plugin. There might be some people in there who do not have an account on wiki-m - just go ahead and create one. <http://moinmo.in/MacroMarket/PageComment2?action=show&redirect=MacroMarket%2FPageComment#head-2c718f2ee00772e4b21efd1311a56ff8e21f9195> has instructions on how to use the comment macro, I already put it on <http://wiki-m.centos.org/FrontPage> and <http://wiki-m.centos.org/FAQ/General>. One thing which directly bothers me is that you can have only *one* comment field on each page, so there is no way to add a comment box to each of the questions in the FAQ section. If you do so, all comment boxes will show *all* comments. If people in here think that this could work, I would put that into the Footer of each wiki page, so comments will be enabled on *all* wiki pages. And hope that people delete or tell us about bad content in those comments. Which directly brings me to part two of this mail. b) Opening up the wiki We had some more or less internal talks about that on Fosdem and via mail and on IRC. While the situation we have at the moment keeps spammers away, it also keeps away people who would like to edit stuff on the wiki or just correct an error on the page, as they have to create an account, subscribe to this mailing list *and* get access to pages they want to edit or correct. Opening up the wiki completely does mean, that we will have to deal with spam, so we need an active Editor Group for the wiki - people who get mails for each page which has changed (maybe even for comments, see above) and check that against our (nonwritten) policy. The second thing: I would still like to know about contributors (and have contributors "sign" some sort of policy): We do not want to have content where people are told to build from sources, to always use the most current versions, we do not want advocacy on the wiki. Moin as we know it cannot do that on the account creation page. So there would be two solutions: Allow everyone to edit content everywhere except on especially hidden or protected pages and/or create a new account creation mechanism for moin. Or as a third way: Require people to mail their account names to the above mentioned editor team with some "signed" text we'd still have to write up. Then - in a timely fashion - one of this editor group can put that account on the EditGroup page. Discuss! (and please edit your mails, so we all can see which part of this rather longish mail you are replying) I'd like to have your opinion on both things - comments and the opening of the wiki - an if you want to be in that Editor team, you can also raise your hand now ... Cheers, Ralph -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20080518/ea5a7fe0/attachment.sig>
Ralph Angenendt wrote:> Or as a third way: Require people to mail > their account names to the above mentioned editor team with some > "signed" text we'd still have to write up. Then - in a timely fashion - > one of this editor group can put that account on the EditGroup page.This could be done with Mailman if the editorial team also will act as moderators for the centos-docs list. We can set mails from non-members as moderated, so these mails will pop up as a request with the mailing list moderators. Problem with that: At the moment we discard mails from non-members, so I have no idea how much spam is hitting this list - and that would also have to be dealt with by the editorial team then. Cheers, Ralph -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20080518/82092437/attachment.sig>
Ralph Angenendt wrote:> > b) Opening up the wiki > > We had some more or less internal talks about that on Fosdem and via > mail and on IRC. While the situation we have at the moment keeps > spammers away, it also keeps away people who would like to edit stuff on > the wiki or just correct an error on the page, as they have to create an > account, subscribe to this mailing list *and* get access to pages they > want to edit or correct. > > Opening up the wiki completely does mean, that we will have to deal with > spam, so we need an active Editor Group for the wiki - people who get > mails for each page which has changed (maybe even for comments, see > above) and check that against our (nonwritten) policy. >So how would that work - you could post/edit without even having an account? I see how that would lead to spam. I would prefer to see a system whereby a user still needs to register an account, but once they have an account they can automatically create and edit content. Might that be enough to deter spammers? Overall, I'm in favour of opening up the process.> The second thing: I would still like to know about contributors (and > have contributors "sign" some sort of policy): We do not want to have > content where people are told to build from sources, to always use the > most current versions, we do not want advocacy on the wiki. >Agreed. At the very least they need to agree to the Creative Commons copyright license.> > I'd like to have your opinion on both things - comments and the opening > of the wiki - an if you want to be in that Editor team, you can also > raise your hand now ... >I would certainly agree to moderate pages I have created and/or currently maintain, but I wouldn't want to commit myself to being a site wide moderator of content (or rather don't *expect* me to moderate other pages - if I happen across bad stuff, of course I'd remove it, but I'm not going to go looking). I consider this an acceptable consequence of opening up the Wiki. If each page has one (or maybe more) people assigned to moderate it, that could work.
Hi Ralph, et al-- As a noob (to this list, not to CentOS and definatly not to Linux), I thought I'd throw in my .002... I joined this list because I was following the directions on the wiki for contributing -- after asking around on IRC, I wasn't able to find any help in customizing centos-5 (for Kickstart), and ended up hacking on it until I figured it all out... I was going to write up some docs for the wiki, but haven't had time yet (and in general I like to lurk on a mailing list prior to posting to it :-).> b) Opening up the wiki > > We had some more or less internal talks about that on Fosdem and viamail and on IRC. While the situation we have at the moment keeps spammers away, it also keeps away people who would like to edit stuff on the wiki or just correct an error on the page, as they have to create an account, subscribe to this mailing list *and* get access to pages they want to edit or correct.> > Opening up the wiki completely does mean, that we will have to deal withspam, so we need an active Editor Group for the wiki - people who get mails for each page which has changed (maybe even for comments, see above) and check that against our (nonwritten) policy. I'm very much in favor of opening up the wiki, as long as the mods/eds keep tabs on every change (perhapps changes can be moderated, so they are reviewed before going live?). I would be willing to contribute in this capacity from time to time (but don't expect 8hrs a day :-). There should be a balance to ensure that as much accurate information is available as possible (which the current situation is far from -- probably due in part to the work involved in getting access to write things up) while at the same time carefully preserving the accuracy and completeness of those pages that are available (no information is more desireable than wrong information). I think that if you require a real user (no anonymous) with a captcha and an email cookie, you'll block out almost 100% of the spam. Karanbir already hit on this -- good. Then you just have to worry about things like people editing a page to ask a question inline, people posting wrong or misleading information, etc. Those are easy problems to solve with a good mod/ed staff. :-) -Matt-
-----Original Message----- From: centos-docs-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-docs-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ned Slider Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 2:53 PM To: Mail list for wiki articles Subject: Re: [CentOS-docs] Opening of the Wiki - Part I Ralph Angenendt wrote:> > b) Opening up the wikiNot such a good idea...Hope you have a good spam filter in mind.> Opening up the wiki completely does mean, that we will have to deal > with spamMaybe more than the CentOS Project is willing to handle. I do understand the true "Wiki Nature", that it is to be open to all that want to participate in it. (the general public)> I'd like to have your opinion on both things - comments and the > opening of the wiki - an if you want to be in that Editor team, you > can also raise your hand now ...I could commit time to it on the weekends, the same thing I said for the HowTOs>I would certainly agree to moderate pages I have created and/or currentlymaintain, but I wouldn't want to>commit myself to being a site wide moderator of contentAggree..I would like for the Authors name and Co-Authored names to remain on the article they have written. JohnStanley _______________________________________________ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
Ralph Angenendt wrote:> Moin as we know it cannot do that on the account creation page. So there > would be two solutions: Allow everyone to edit content everywhere except > on especially hidden or protected pages and/or create a new account > creation mechanism for moin. Or as a third way: Require people to mail > their account names to the above mentioned editor team with some > "signed" text we'd still have to write up. Then - in a timely fashion - > one of this editor group can put that account on the EditGroup page.Okay, this has gone to sleep. I'd like to know two things: 1: Who would like to be on an editorial team for the wiki? That means that you must monitor changes to all pages. 2: Is everbody fine with the following? Contributors add their account to the wiki and after that have to send us a mail in which they state that they are okay with putting their content under the CC license the wiki is running under. After that mail has come in, one of the editorial team adds that account to <http://wiki.centos.org/EditGroup>. Regarding this I don't know yet where that mail should be sent. Or do we still want to have people who want to contribute subscribe to this list? Cheers, Ralph -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20080603/7e45fe5a/attachment-0003.sig>
Ralph Angenendt wrote:> Ralph Angenendt wrote: >> Moin as we know it cannot do that on the account creation page. So there >> would be two solutions: Allow everyone to edit content everywhere except >> on especially hidden or protected pages and/or create a new account >> creation mechanism for moin. Or as a third way: Require people to mail >> their account names to the above mentioned editor team with some >> "signed" text we'd still have to write up. Then - in a timely fashion - >> one of this editor group can put that account on the EditGroup page. > > Okay, this has gone to sleep. > > I'd like to know two things: > > 1: > Who would like to be on an editorial team for the wiki? That means that > you must monitor changes to all pages.In the interests of "many hands make light work", I'd be prepared to sign up to that so long as I'm not the only one! :)> > 2: > Is everbody fine with the following? Contributors add their account to > the wiki and after that have to send us a mail in which they state that > they are okay with putting their content under the CC license the wiki > is running under. After that mail has come in, one of the editorial team > adds that account to <http://wiki.centos.org/EditGroup>.Yes> > Regarding this I don't know yet where that mail should be sent. Or do we > still want to have people who want to contribute subscribe to this > list?Either here (centos-docs) or a dedicated Wiki editorial team ML? As this list already exists, may as well just use it?
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos at br-online.de> wrote: ...snip...> > I'd like to know two things: > > 1: > Who would like to be on an editorial team for the wiki? That means that > you must monitor changes to all pages./me raises his hand.> 2: > Is everbody fine with the following? Contributors add their account to > the wiki and after that have to send us a mail in which they state that > they are okay with putting their content under the CC license the wiki > is running under. After that mail has come in, one of the editorial team > adds that account to <http://wiki.centos.org/EditGroup>.Agreed, sounds good.> Regarding this I don't know yet where that mail should be sent. Or do we > still want to have people who want to contribute subscribe to this > list?For me people don't need to be subscribe (as in must), but they are encouraged to do so (as in may). Can people not subscribe to centos-docs mail to it ? Regards, Tim -- Tim Verhoeven - tim.verhoeven.be at gmail.com - 0479 / 88 11 83 Hoping the problem magically goes away by ignoring it is the "microsoft approach to programming" and should never be allowed. (Linus Torvalds)