Sure...should I categorise this as just a "TASK" or maybe a "STORY".....kinda new to all this so not sure what category this issue would fall under. (I dread to think what gets put under "EPIC" !)
-Thomas ~~~~~~ Reviews of anything, by anyone; www.rateoholic.co.uk Please try out my new site and give feedback :) On 29 August 2011 14:44, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for picking this up Thomas. You can open an issue in the Wave JIRA > for this and assign it to yourself. > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Thomas Wrobel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Seeing as I didn't have much luck picking apart the code, I could have >> a go at this. At least to put more details in then there is now. >> >> Probably need checking over after I'm done for accuracy/missing >> information. (and spelling...) >> >> Shall I sign up for the task? >> >> -Thomas Wrobel >> >> ~~~~~~ >> Reviews of anything, by anyone; >> www.rateoholic.co.uk >> Please try out my new site and give feedback :) >> >> >> >> On 27 August 2011 14:09, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I think a good first step for creation Apache Wave Wiki page would be >> fill >> > in the "History" part of the "About Apache Wave" page at >> > http://incubator.apache.org/wave/about.html. >> > >> > Currently the "History" contains the following TODO: "Lets summarize >> Google >> > Wave, Fed One, Wave in a Box, Apache Wave, the protocol, etc. It will be >> > interesting to keep this information for people to understand how the >> > project has evolved." >> > >> > Would be great of someone would take on the task to address this TODO. >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Great! Thanks for taking on this! >> >> >> >> >> >> 2011/8/10 Jérémy Naegel <[email protected]> >> >> >> >>> Suggestion made here : >> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Apache_Wave#Apache_Wave >> >>> >> >>> - Jeremy >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Jérémy Naegel <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > What I'm not familiar with is the Wikipedia revision / revocation of >> >>> > changes policy... >> >>> > >> >>> > I'll try to suggest that change inside the discussion page and see if >> it >> >>> > triggers any reaction. >> >>> > After a few days without reactions or with positive reactions, I >> guess >> >>> it >> >>> > would be OK to change back the title. >> >>> > >> >>> > Then it will be possible to create a new "Apache Wave" entry (as it >> >>> won't >> >>> > be a duplicate). >> >>> > I could start it, with the Apache Wave website definition and some >> >>> general >> >>> > infos, but I won't be able to add technical details. >> >>> > >> >>> > Btw, If someone whose mother tongue is English wants to help, that >> would >> >>> be >> >>> > much appreciated! >> >>> > >> >>> > - Jeremy >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Yuri Z <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> I see. So I guess that's what should be done. The entry should be >> >>> renamed >> >>> >> back to Google Wave and a new entry for Apache Wave (and Wave in a >> Box) >> >>> >> should be created. >> >>> >> I am not that familiar with the standards for creating Wiki entries, >> >>> also, >> >>> >> I personally would prefer to spend my spare time on actually >> creating >> >>> >> patches for WIAB. So I thought that maybe some non technical >> community >> >>> >> member would like to take on this (actually very important) task. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 2011/8/10 Jérémy Naegel <[email protected]> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > About this Apache Wave Wikipedia page : It was, up until a couple >> of >> >>> >> > months, >> >>> >> > the Google Wave page and it has simply been renamed Apache Wave. I >> >>> think >> >>> >> it >> >>> >> > was a bad move, this page should have stayed the Google Wave page >> >>> since >> >>> >> > Google Wave is still an existing service, and a new Apache Wave >> page >> >>> >> should >> >>> >> > have been created from scratch since it's a fresh start for the >> >>> product. >> >>> >> I >> >>> >> > think the renaming edit of the page should simply be undone, but I >> >>> guess >> >>> >> > this will trigger a debate among the contributors. >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > - Jeremy >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Dan Peterson < >> [email protected] >> >>> > >> >>> >> > wrote: >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > > Agreed -- go for it! >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> >>> >> > > From: Upayavira [mailto:[email protected]] >> >>> >> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 04:33 AM >> >>> >> > > To: [email protected] < >> [email protected]> >> >>> >> > > Subject: Re: Update Wiki for Apache Wave >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > I'd say just do it. If anyone wants to help, they will have an >> >>> 'edit' >> >>> >> > > button too. >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > Upayavira >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:25 +0300, "Yuri Z" <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> > > > I stumbled upon the Wiki page for Apache >> >>> >> > > > Wave<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Wave>- and my >> >>> impression >> >>> >> was >> >>> >> > > > that it's of very low quality and conveys very >> >>> >> > > > little information about Apache Wave and Wave in a Box >> project. >> >>> Most >> >>> >> of >> >>> >> > > > the >> >>> >> > > > information is related to Google Wave. I thought that it >> could >> >>> be >> >>> >> nice >> >>> >> > > > to >> >>> >> > > > discuss how we can improve /restructure the Wiki entry for >> Apache >> >>> >> Wave. >> >>> >> > > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >
