Annotation of wikisrc/wiki/todo/let_non-developers_contribute_content.mdwn, revision 1.17
1.9 schmonz 1: [[tron]] suggests that non-developers should be able to post content
2: to a staging area, to be approved (possibly after editing) by
3: developers. [[schmonz]] likes this idea a lot.
5: > what about to make a sub-page called e.g. User contributed
6: > documentation an give non-developers rw access there while editing
7: > other parts(TNF contributed) of wiki will require developers account
8: > or possible some sort of bless from a developer. --[[haad]]
1.10 schmonz 10: >> From ikiwiki's PoV, this is equivalent to the Discussion-subpage
11: >> approach (merely a tweak to a PageSpec). From the human PoV, it's
12: >> a tradeoff. If we make a whole hierarchy world-editable, users will
13: >> be able to directly edit any page in that hierarchy, but we'll wind
14: >> up with two pages on every topic of interest and readers will have
15: >> to check both. A discussion subpage isn't the page itself, but the
16: >> relation of the two is never ambiguous.
18: >> Neither approach is ideal. A possible improvement: in addition
1.11 schmonz 19: >> to making making Discussion pages world-editable, use the
20: >> [[!iki ikiwiki/directive/inline]] directive on each main topic page to
1.10 schmonz 21: >> include the relevant Discussion subpage below, with a disclaimer
22: >> about the provenance of that content. Then both developers and users
23: >> can effectively edit the page, and the reader can easily discern
24: >> what's what.
26: >> Best if this inlining could be automated somehow, rather than
27: >> requiring someone to add a directive to each page. --[[schmonz]]
1.17 ! schmonz 29: >>> I don't understand why we are making user editing so hard, with
! 30: >>> discussion pages there will belittle or no user contribution which
! 31: >>> is wrong because main point of wiki is to give users power to share
! 32: >>> information not give this power to developers. Lets make part of
! 33: >>> wiki editable by users to let them contribute their documentation.
! 34: >>> If user will want to make his own page about e.g. suing NetBSD as
! 35: >>> xen server how he will done it with discussion pages ?
1.15 wiki 36: >>>
1.17 ! schmonz 37: >>> From other POV I looked at FreeBSD wiki and they have developers
! 38: >>> only wiki which can be edited by developers and some small number
! 39: >>> of non developers. --[[haad]]
1.15 wiki 40:
1.9 schmonz 41: _For non-developers using [[anonymous CVS|wiki/todo/push_wikisrc_to_anoncvs]]_:
42: submit a diff to `netbsd-docs@`.
44: _For non-developers using a web browser_: the ikiwiki discussion
45: subpage and/or [[!iki plugins/comments desc="comments plugin"]] may
46: point toward the solution.
1.3 wiki 47:
48: One of the reasons we [[chose ikiwiki|wiki/todo/choose_wiki_software]]
1.9 schmonz 49: is the ability to edit via CVS directly, as well as via the web.
50: As long as every wiki editor is a developer, controlling access
51: consistently is simple. In order to open up wiki editing to
52: non-developers, we have to think carefully about both the CVS case
53: and the web case.
1.3 wiki 54:
55: In the short term, to start getting non-developers involved, I intend
56: to [[push wikisrc to anoncvs]] and
57: [[hook up wiki commits to www-changes@]].
59: In the long term, ikiwiki has a few ready-made web authentication
60: options (a locally managed user database, OpenID, and HTTP auth), and
61: if they don't suffice for some reason, it's easy enough to write an
62: auth plugin. The hard part is deciding the workflow: where is a
63: sensible place for non-developers to make their edits, and what is a
64: sensible way for developers to review and "bless" the changes? Two
65: ikiwiki-native possibilities are listed above.
67: Ideas welcome! Edit this page and add your comments. --[[schmonz]]
1.4 wiki 68:
1.5 wiki 69: One idea (which needs to be considered by board@):
1.4 wiki 70:
71: 7. Enable Discussion subpages.
72: 7. Mark very clearly on the Discussion page template that content may
73: have been written by anyone at all and has not been vetted by any
74: member of TNF.
1.6 wiki 75: 7. Enable the `anonok` plugin and set the `anonok_pagespec` to allow
76: anonymous editing of Discussion subpages (and of no other pages).
1.4 wiki 77:
1.12 wiki 78: > This doesn't actually work, though. Trying to create or edit a
1.14 schmonz 79: > Discussion subpage yields the HTTP auth dialog. And this is
80: > equivalent to the `opendiscussion` plugin. Joey says:
1.13 schmonz 81: > "it's a bug, not sure how to fix it right now". --[[schmonz]]
1.12 wiki 82:
1.4 wiki 83: The resulting workflow:
85: 7. Non-developer finds a page to which to suggest changes.
1.9 schmonz 86: 7. Non-developer edits its Discussion subpage and writes the suggested
88: 7. Developer who follows [[RecentChanges]] (or the commit mails)
89: notices the changes.
90: 7. If the changes aren't acceptable, developer edits the Discussion
91: subpage and explains why not.
92: 7. If the changes are acceptable, developer applies them to the
93: page and removes them from the Discussion subpage.
95: > This can be work flow for a TNF contributed pages but as I said
96: > above this is not acceptable for as normal wiki workflow. We had
97: > almost similar discussion about comments on a blog software for
98: > NetBSD. There were developers who thought that there will be too
99: > many comments and we do not have man power to read/approve them
100: > all. After setting blog we have found that we have barely 1-2
101: > comments in every third article. I don;t thing that there will be
102: > too many real editors on our wiki from non-developers and therefore
103: > we need to make it easy not hard to do. --[[haad]]
1.12 wiki 104:
105: >> Another issue:
CVSweb for NetBSD wikisrc <wikimaster@NetBSD.org> software: FreeBSD-CVSweb