Open Stack

Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Sean Dague wrote:
>> On 05/09/2016 06:53 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
>>> On 05/09/2016 05:45 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>>> IIRC mediawiki provides RSS of changes... maybe just using the wiki
>>>> more would be a good start, and have zero infra costs?
>>>
>>> We'd actually like to start using the wiki less, per the most recent
>>> summit. Also, the wiki currently has new accounts turned off (thanks
>>> spammers) so if you don't have a wiki account now, you're not getting
>>> one soon.
>>
>> Hmm... that's unfortunate, as we were trying to get some of our less
>> ephemeral items out of random etherpads and into the wiki (which has the
>> value of being google indexed).
>
> The Google indexing is also what makes the wiki so painful... After 6
> years most of the content there is inaccurate or outdated. It's a
> massive effort to clean it up without breaking the Google juice, and
> nobody has the universal knowledge to determine if pages are still
> accurate or not. We are bitten every day by newcomers finding wrong
> information on the wiki and acting using it. It's getting worse every
> day we keep on using it.
>
> Also the Google juice is what made our wiki a target for spammers /
> defacers. We don't have an army of maintainers like wikipedia ready to
> jump at any defacement, so the fully open nature of the wiki which makes
> it so convenient (anyone can create or modify a page), is also it's
> major flaw (anyone can create or modify a page).
>
> We moved most of the reference information out of the wiki to proper
> documentation and peer-reviewed websites (security.o.o, governance.o.o,
> releases.o.o...) but we still need somewhere to easily publish random
> pages -- something between etherpad (too transient) and proper
> documentation (too formal). Ideally the new tool would make it clear
> that the page is not canonical information, so that we avoid the wiki
> effect. Three options:
>
> * Keep the current wiki to achieve that (valid option if we have a whole
> team of wiki gardeners to weed out outdated pages and watch for
> spam/defacement -- and history proved that we don't)
>
> * Drop the current wiki and replace it by another lightweight
> publication solution (if there is anything convenient)
>
> * Deprecate the current wiki and start over with another wiki (with
> stronger ACL support ?)
>

Would the previous topic (team blogs) that this was be a good 
replacement, if information on the wiki is project specific then why not 
just allow each project to have a blog and/or wiki-blog combination and 
then the project that owns the blog/wiki-blog would be responsible for 
maintaining it...

I don't know if any software solution exists for this, but I guess we 
are all brainstorming anyway :)

-Josh