I'll have to apologize, I didn't realize this discussion had 3 pages and therefore missed the last two. Looks like we're going with a homegrown wiki. Not necessarly my first choice, but cool indeed. Here's a couple of things I use regularly in other wikis that I kind of miss in web2py wiki: -a page tree -recent changes page and rss feed -a public link to revision history and diffs
On Feb 28, 3:47 am, Pedro <pedro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Nice to see some enthusiasm and attitude towards solid documentation. > I was one of those around when the current wiki was put up. The fact > that it was a bit buggy did interfere with its function. Also the fact > that it has a different look and feel from what most users are used > to, and some lack of links in the website and other strategic places > might have also contributed to the current situation. > I submitted two pages or so, and I found myself in a situation where I > had to go and check in the book whatever I wanted to write in there. > This gave me a weird feeling of pointlessness. > > Personally, from a visitor point of view I love trac. It gives a very > good picture of how the source is evolving. It comes with a wiki > engine that I believe has most of the standard capabilities of others. > If the main trunk is going to a public access SVN repository then trac > can be the most logical choice. > On the other hand if the wiki is the only thing on trac to be used by > web2py project, then I think we'd be better of with whatever is > easiest to setup/maintain. Anything would to it, there's even hosted > wiki solutions if nobody is interested in maintain a wiki wiki > installation. > > Now there's a couple of things that still worry me. Like, I red the > book and that's about all the knowledge I have on web2py. I don't feel > capable of writing good docs on web2py apart from what can be red in > the book. But that's just me, I've only used web2py in personal > projects, more for the fun of it than any other reason. Is there many > people out there using web2py at a production level? > > I vote for a manual. I've seen huge projects that totally fail in > document themselves due to going other ways than having an official > manual (rails or joomla, for example). > > I like the kind of layout used in the book, with the topics loosely > connected to each others. Not a huge novel-like tutorial, nor a simple > API reference. > I don't know if anybody in here is familiar with codeigniter, but > here's an example of a very good online > manual:http://codeigniter.com/user_guide/ > and here's the community version docs of a forkhttp://docs.kohanaphp.com/ > > the latest is a wiki. You'll notice both have a style very similar to > massimo's book. > > Ok, this turned out to be a long email... > I volunteer to help in small stupid-simple docs, which is all I'll be > able to do for a while. > > On Feb 25, 4:00 pm, Fran <francisb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 25, 2:51 pm, Paul Eden <benchl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > - Doesn't Django use Trac? > > > Yes:http://code.djangoproject.com/ > > > > using the framework shows a lot of confidence in it > > > If the Wiki could have versioning added, that would take away the > > major constraint to it. > > Not sure how hard that is... > > > F --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py Web Framework" group. To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
