Since the beginning of this year DC have moved alot of debate and discussion out of mailing lists, and in to Wikis. http://www.zope.org/WikiCentral/FrontPage lists most Zope Wikis. Does anyone else find Wikis to be far less convenient than a good old mailing list? Ive been annoyed by the following characteristics: 1. No threading. On several occasions I have made comments in a Wiki that were subsequently ignored - I guess because they got lost in the mass of other edits. Recently people have been adding edits to the end of the page: This makes it easier to keep track of changes, but harder to catch up on a discussion when you come to it for the first time. 2. No personal replies. On several occasions I would have liked to email a comment personally to another contributer, but they didnt leave an email address. 3. No update notification. The one time I was update to keep up with a Wiki discussion involved the other participant always manually emailing a change notification. 4. Hard to keep track of many Wikis: Each wiki has its own 'whats changed' page, but even those are too coarse. 5. Too easy to fragment a discussion. On several occasions I have thought that a discussion had dried up, only to find out later on that it had moved to another page. 6. Too easy to miss the creation of a Wiki. On several occasions people have posted comments on zopedev questioning why noone has commented on their page - Noone knew it was there. This is particularly a problem because Wikis tend to get created sooner than a new mailing list would do, out of the desire to capture all discussion inside that Wiki. Mailing lists only tend to get created once there is enough traffic to justify them, and by then everyone is aware of the topic. 7. Too easy to loose content. On several occasions I have been unable to add a comments to a Wiki, either because www.zope.org would not let me login, or because its database was full. 8. Editing is painful. I have to use the browsers text field, and the whole Wiki page has to make a round trip with every change. 9. I never get the structured text quoting of python source right first time. 10. There are too many empty pages, because someone has clicked on a ? next to word that happened to be a WikiName. Useful pages lie hidden behind a sea of links to empty pages. rant ends. Toby Dickenson tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com
Toby Dickenson wrote:
http://www.zope.org/WikiCentral/FrontPage lists most Zope Wikis. Does anyone else find Wikis to be far less convenient than a good old mailing list?
Each has their ups and downs :-S
1. No threading. On several occasions I have made comments in a Wiki that were subsequently ignored - I guess because they got lost in the mass of other edits. Recently people have been adding edits to the end of the page: This makes it easier to keep track of changes, but harder to catch up on a discussion when you come to it for the first time.
...and there's still the problem of finding out who made what changes to what. I thought 2.2's history-isms would help here?
2. No personal replies. On several occasions I would have liked to email a comment personally to another contributer, but they didnt leave an email address.
That's a tough one though, isn't it?
3. No update notification. The one time I was update to keep up with a Wiki discussion involved the other participant always manually emailing a change notification.
Yeah, that's not _that_ hard to do, and I wish it'd be done a long time ago :-S
4. Hard to keep track of many Wikis: Each wiki has its own 'whats changed' page, but even those are too coarse.
Yeah, that is a tough one too :-S
5. Too easy to fragment a discussion. On several occasions I have thought that a discussion had dried up, only to find out later on that it had moved to another page.
...that's just bad use of Wiki, although sadly, that's qutie easy to do...
8. Editing is painful. I have to use the browsers text field, and the whole Wiki page has to make a round trip with every change.
What about FTP? I'm pretty sure you can do it into zope.org although I can never remember the port number :-S
9. I never get the structured text quoting of python source right first time.
DTML is _that_ much worse too :S < and RSI anyone? ;-)
10. There are too many empty pages, because someone has clicked on a ? next to word that happened to be a WikiName. Useful pages lie hidden behind a sea of links to empty pages.
Yeah, this also makes the RecentChanges page kindof useless too :-S Okay, here's an idea which people may or may not like: How about running the 'Discussion' parts of (in particular) dev.zope.org from ZDiscussions, ZUBB or Squishdot? These products are designed for discussion and are better at it than a Wiki. Speaking for Squishdot, you get a lot of notifcation (not as much as I'd like, wait for Swishdot for that ;-) and threading, and it's even got Stuctured Text support now. <end of advert ;-)> I dunno about other people, but I've given up on dev.zope.org simply because I cannot track the changes without having to put in a disproportionate amount of work. This has meant that a lot of proposals which could help with things that I really hate about Zope (DTML, lack of ability to 'hide' methods like standard_html_footer from URL access, lack of groups in Zope security) I haven't had the opportunity to comment on in a useful way (yes, yes, no comments about my views being useful ;-) way. end of Rant II ;-) Chris
A lot of the listed complaints are trying to be addressed by the "WikiNG" proposal, which is (of course) in the Proposals wiki on dev.zope.org.
Okay, here's an idea which people may or may not like: How about running the 'Discussion' parts of (in particular) dev.zope.org from ZDiscussions, ZUBB or Squishdot? These products are designed for discussion and are better at it than a Wiki. Speaking for Squishdot, you get a lot of notifcation (not as much as I'd like, wait for Swishdot for that ;-) and threading, and it's even got Stuctured Text support now.
<end of advert ;-)>
This may be a good idea... personally, I really don't have much of a problem keeping up with the discussions, but it seems a lot of people do. This idea should probably be floated in dev.zope.org itself as a proposal.
I dunno about other people, but I've given up on dev.zope.org simply because I cannot track the changes without having to put in a disproportionate amount of work.
You give up fast.
Chris McDonough wrote:
A lot of the listed complaints are trying to be addressed by the "WikiNG" proposal, which is (of course) in the Proposals wiki on dev.zope.org.
The irony ;-)
This may be a good idea... personally, I really don't have much of a problem keeping up with the discussions, but it seems a lot of people do. This idea should probably be floated in dev.zope.org itself as a proposal.
I'll give it a go :-S How abotu a cross between a Discussion Forum and a Wiki?
I dunno about other people, but I've given up on dev.zope.org simply because I cannot track the changes without having to put in a disproportionate amount of work.
You give up fast.
Sorry, bad choice of phrasing... I've given up trying to follow the stuff on there, which, I think, means I miss out on lots of stuff there :-S I still think dev.zope.ogr is a 'very good thing' (tm) :-) cheers, Chris
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 chrisw@nipltd.com wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
A lot of the listed complaints are trying to be addressed by the "WikiNG" proposal, which is (of course) in the Proposals wiki on dev.zope.org.
The irony ;-)
This may be a good idea... personally, I really don't have much of a problem keeping up with the discussions, but it seems a lot of people do. This idea should probably be floated in dev.zope.org itself as a proposal.
I'll give it a go :-S
How abotu a cross between a Discussion Forum and a Wiki?
This is what i tried to get at with the part of the proposal about tailored structuring of wikis. Append-to-end structuring for weblog style wikis, allow-only-nesting (not-editing-of-other-peoples-stuff) for more elaborate structuring, etc. Structuring to the purpose, while exploiting wiki features, could be cool. If it ever gets a chance to happen, sigh. Ken Manheimer klm@digicool.com
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:11:56 -0400, Chris McDonough <chrism@digicool.com> wrote:
A lot of the listed complaints are trying to be addressed by the "WikiNG" proposal, which is (of course) in the Proposals wiki on dev.zope.org.
Yes, I was aware of that proposal, and I tried to avoid repeating issues that are already being discussed there. WikiNG is a better kind of collaborative-editing tool, but that seems to be fundamentally the wrong medium for debate.
How about running the 'Discussion' parts of (in particular) dev.zope.org from ZDiscussions, ZUBB or Squishdot?
This may be a good idea...
What's wrong with a mailing list? Is this just a case of NIH? This thread has already been more productive than anything Ive done on a Zope Wiki over the last year, and taken a fraction of the effort. Toby Dickenson tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 mbel44@dial.pipex.net wrote:
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:11:56 -0400, Chris McDonough <chrism@digicool.com> wrote:
A lot of the listed complaints are trying to be addressed by the "WikiNG" proposal, which is (of course) in the Proposals wiki on dev.zope.org.
Yes, I was aware of that proposal, and I tried to avoid repeating issues that are already being discussed there. WikiNG is a better kind of collaborative-editing tool, but that seems to be fundamentally the wrong medium for debate.
There's a lot in the proposal. In some cases, there are things that address the items you mention. In many cases, they pertain - and if i had been doing elaboration rather than inception, i would have addressed them, because i too am concerned with (and was thinking about) those issues. For example, from your original posting (cited with a '|'): | 1. No threading. On several occasions I have made comments in a Wiki | that were subsequently ignored - I guess because they got lost in the and from the WikiNG proposal: For more elaborate editorial and commentary annotations, i can see layered documents, using mixin objects that provide a tailored view on other or contained objects. The mixin would be a layer by which annotations are associated with text passages in the rendered subject document, like "the crit system":http://crit.org does for arbitrary web pages. Overall, document authors could use a particular annotation structure according to their needs. Eg, discussion objects for points which can be discussed, or brief editorial passages to give feedback, and author checkmarks for when they've satisfied or refute the suggestions, etc. Annotation is a spiffy kind of threading. | 2. No personal replies. On several occasions I would have liked to
From WikiNG:
- Attribution of changes for tracking With attribution, you can identify and could respond directly to the author of a particular passage. It's useful for more, of course. | 3. No update notification. The one time I was update to keep up with a WikiNG: - Notification - Zope wikis will be able to leverage another generic (planned) Zope service, the Observer-pattern based Notification service (ZopeInterfacesWiki:ObserverAndNotification). This will implement a general system for notifying user of changes according to their registered interests, with added benefits of tracking exactly the substance of those changes for the user (see History and the last item in Membership, above). Notification begins to enable some mailing-list style collaboration qualities, with finer-grained content-based control. | 4. Hard to keep track of many Wikis: Each wiki has its own 'whats The ability to subscribe for notification (above) and/or to track what you personally have seen, and not, is intended for this kind of thing. | 5. Too easy to fragment a discussion. On several occasions I have This is a practice issue, which can be helped with tailored structuring and policy controls, but which also involves maturation of convention practices that comes with experience. We also need a more interconnectable space, so that references across wikis can be more tightly coupled, and make it easier to track the interconnections. | 6. Too easy to miss the creation of a Wiki. On several occasions My plans for notification subscriptions would be hierarchical, and enable you to subscribe to events like creations of new wikis within a hierarchy - so if you subscribe at the top of the wiki space, you find out about any new wikis, while if you subscribe within the developer's part of the space, you learn about new developers wikis. Etc. (This was not covered in the WikiNG proposal - i was trying to avoid including too many details, and failed miserably anyway...-) | 7. Too easy to loose content. On several occasions I have been unable | to add a comments to a Wiki, either because www.zope.org would not let | me login, or because its database was full. That sucks, and should be fixed. I suppose it is a drawback of wikis in as much as they need to be available to work on them, while followups on an email discussion can continue even if the maillist host is down. Up to a point, though. | 9. I never get the structured text quoting of python source right | first time. The only quoting you need to know is example:: The two colons after the word "example" indicate that this contained block is all quoted. No matter what, there's some learning to be done to encode presentation/structuring. Structured Text happens to be the best i've found for doing that, particularly for naturalness - but i haven't looked at all the options, maybe there are better. | 10. There are too many empty pages, because someone has clicked on a ? | next to word that happened to be a WikiName. Useful pages lie hidden | behind a sea of links to empty pages. This is something i couldn't cover in my proposal, because of the fineness of the detail, but i think everyone agrees that the flow for creating pages needs to be fixed. Plus, the security refinements will enable policies about who can and can't create, to restrict from gratuitous creations. Plus, ownership of pages you create provides audit, so offenders have some consequences. Etc.
How about running the 'Discussion' parts of (in particular) dev.zope.org from ZDiscussions, ZUBB or Squishdot?
This may be a good idea...
What's wrong with a mailing list? Is this just a case of NIH?
As i said in my last reply (but after you posted this, so you couldn't have taken it into account), mailling lists as they stand don't work for establishing growing structures. And i can tell you it's *not* a case of not-invented-here - i *could* have worked more on mailman, if i wanted to claim some kind of ownership and thought i could force mailling lists into this purpose. But i don't think they are at all right for what i want to do - collaboratively developed bodies of documents - as they stand. (I *do* think the eventual thing - wikis with elaborate notifications - could be seen as content-oriented mailling lists. But they will probably be more recognizable as wikis than as maillists.)
This thread has already been more productive than anything Ive done on a Zope Wiki over the last year, and taken a fraction of the effort.
The lack of notification, attribution, etc are real problems for wikis. However, i *still* find them quite useful for organizing our thoughts, in ways i can't do with maillists. (As it is, i'll try to keep track of this message, so i can at some point go back and reap the bits of new information for deployment in one of my notes outlines or in a wiki. I'd prefer to constructing this as annotations on a collaborative document, and knowing you'll get a notice when i commit it. That way, i wouldn't need to spend all this time cutting and pasting, and going through contortions to distinguish the different passages, and so forth - the wiki would be doing that for me.) Maillists simply can't do that - the need something (like a wiki) to collect and organize the stories. I have the sense your complaints are parly about how the wikis fail to live up to their promise, because of the missing pieces, than that maillists could be doing what we're doing with the wikis. That's my view, though, maybe i'm just projecting it on you - sorry about that, if so!-) Ken Manheimer klm@digicool.com
Toby Dickenson wrote:
How about running the 'Discussion' parts of (in particular) dev.zope.org from ZDiscussions, ZUBB or Squishdot?
This may be a good idea...
What's wrong with a mailing list? Is this just a case of NIH?
Setting up a mailing list for each proposal is painful. Setting up a Squishdot site for each proposal takes 5 minutes, and could even be worked into a 'Create New Proposal' DTML or Python method... Chris
In article <97i1ssond41qovj35maaadbjllu23jsdm4@4ax.com>, Toby Dickenson <tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com> wrote:
10. There are too many empty pages, because someone has clicked on a ? next to word that happened to be a WikiName. Useful pages lie hidden behind a sea of links to empty pages.
IMHO, ZWiki is broken in this respect. Clicking on a '?' shouldn't create a page and take you to the edit form -- it should take you to an edit form, which creates the page on save. I think this would subtantially reduce the number of empty pages created.
Ty Sarna wrote:
In article <97i1ssond41qovj35maaadbjllu23jsdm4@4ax.com>, Toby Dickenson <tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com> wrote:
10. There are too many empty pages, because someone has clicked on a ? next to word that happened to be a WikiName. Useful pages lie hidden behind a sea of links to empty pages.
IMHO, ZWiki is broken in this respect. Clicking on a '?' shouldn't create a page and take you to the edit form -- it should take you to an edit form, which creates the page on save. I think this would subtantially reduce the number of empty pages created.
...totally agree, and it also shouldn't be too hard to code :-S I wonder what Simon Michael is up to nowdays? cheers, Chris
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 mbel44@dial.pipex.net wrote:
Since the beginning of this year DC have moved alot of debate and discussion out of mailing lists, and in to Wikis. http://www.zope.org/WikiCentral/FrontPage lists most Zope Wikis. Does anyone else find Wikis to be far less convenient than a good old mailing list?
Convenient for what? If you've ever tried to support a community through a mailling list, you'll quickly notice that questions, and their corresponding answers, repeat. A lot. The problem is that while maillists are great for keeping people up-to-date on the business of the community, and for disseminating dialogue, they are not so good for building structures - for organizing content so related pieces of a story are appropriately connected. (Note that i do *not* dislike mailling lists - before i joined DC i resurrected mailman from an abandoned prototype and developed it for use on python.org, because we needed a customizable system for conducting the ongoing business of the python community. Maillists just are not right for building structures.) Wikis, as they stand, are not bad for organizing stories. We all sorely miss change notifications and ownership attribution, a preview button, etc - but they're better, even as they currently stand, for building longstanding artifacts than are mailling lists. And hopefully, in not too long, we'll be able to improve them, or provide something else, to do the job right. (I am not hopeful about the fate of the WikiNG proposal right now, the powers that be are dictating that the PTK should be the medium for this kind of thing - and i don't see how to fit the low-impedence features of the wiki in there, and so will be severely disappointed if WikiNG doesn't fly, but that's up to others. In any case, *something* is clearly needed - the wikis are just the best fit for part of the job, right now.) Ken Manheimer klm@digicool.com
Ken Manheimer wrote:
Convenient for what? If you've ever tried to support a community through a mailling list, you'll quickly notice that questions, and their corresponding answers, repeat. A lot. The problem is that while maillists are great for keeping people up-to-date on the business of the community, and for disseminating dialogue, they are not so good for building structures - for organizing content so related pieces of a story are appropriately connected.
The counter that this is that Wikis, in my experience (and maybe mine only ;-), are not a good medium for discussions. There's no threading, ntoficiation or subscription, for starters...
Wikis, as they stand, are not bad for organizing stories.
..agreed, but a lot of Wikis are not being used for this. It's a difficult problem. You need a decent medium for discussion, like a mailing list, which needs to automatically (and that seems _very_ hard to me) extract the necessary 'story' bits and store them in a decent story-building medium...
We all sorely miss change notifications and ownership attribution, a preview button, etc - but they're better, even as they currently stand, for building longstanding artifacts than are mailling lists. And hopefully, in not too long, we'll be able to improve them, or provide something else, to do the job right.
Well, the WikiDot idea is starting to crop up in my brain a bit more now ;-) And since that'd be a Swishdot skin, it'd work with the PTK, and everyone's happy and focussed on what they want to be :-) cheers, Chris
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Chris Withers wrote:
Ken Manheimer wrote:
Convenient for what? If you've ever tried to support a community through a mailling list, you'll quickly notice that questions, and their corresponding answers, repeat. A lot. The problem is that while maillists are great for keeping people up-to-date on the business of the community, and for disseminating dialogue, they are not so good for building structures - for organizing content so related pieces of a story are appropriately connected.
The counter that this is that Wikis, in my experience (and maybe mine only ;-), are not a good medium for discussions. There's no threading, notfication or subscription, for starters...
Clearly, i agree that the absence of those things in the wiki is a problem - i state that directly in the "problems to be addressed" section! *The* thing to understand here is that we're currently in a position where neither wikis nor maillists, in themselves, provide what we need. We need to do *something* in the meanwhile, if only to bootstrap the process so we can get to the point where we have that integration. (You'd have to ask brian and the dev folk, but i think the reason we're going with wiki is because otherwise all this talk gets **lost** - noone has the time to do the transcribing, etc. At least with wikis you can preserve your thoughts and then email interested parties!) My proposal is all about getting there - i yearn to get the time to do some of what's necessary - at least ZClass-ification so i can do the notification stuff in a clean way, because we're suffering without notification - and i'm hoping there will be a window in not too long. I think this discussion is evidence of the need, not of flaws in the proposal!
Wikis, as they stand, are not bad for organizing stories.
..agreed, but a lot of Wikis are not being used for this. It's a difficult problem. You need a decent medium for discussion, like a mailing list, which needs to automatically (and that seems _very_ hard to me) extract the necessary 'story' bits and store them in a decent story-building medium...
Yes - it seems _much_ easier to me to have people annotate the existing wiki (restricted, perhaps, to only adding text, not changing existing text - that's easy to implement, though we'll have to go to some effort to make it user friendly). From the WikiNG proposal: For discussion, i can see two applications of a wiki document option that allows commentators (non-authors) to only add text, not change existing text. (Zope would diff the new revision and reject it if it contains changes to existing text.) Simplest application would be accepting changes only at the end - weblog style. Next simplest would be one that allows insertions anywhere, for comments next to subject lines. (Zope could offer readers knobs for controlling visibility of annotations.) The document authors could have the privilege of editing any text, to consolidate and refine. Both applications would be useful for different kinds of discussions. Wouldn't that be cool - with notifications to interested parties, perhaps including diffs that showed the annotations, and a bit of context? (A further alluring step would be to allow notification subscription options for getting the entire changed document, and enable the email recipients to add their annotations in standard email-citation style, and send them back to zope, for it to incorporate the edits. But that would take some authentication provisions, as well as better email integration...)
We all sorely miss change notifications and ownership attribution, a preview button, etc - but they're better, even as they currently stand, for building longstanding artifacts than are mailling lists. And hopefully, in not too long, we'll be able to improve them, or provide something else, to do the job right.
Well, the WikiDot idea is starting to crop up in my brain a bit more now ;-) And since that'd be a Swishdot skin, it'd work with the PTK, and everyone's happy and focussed on what they want to be :-)
Well, this is, tangentially, a particularly interesting point for me. I've been challenged with how to fit the WikiNG proposal into the PTK - since the PTK is a prime digital creations content management focus, management doesn't want to dilute resource assignments with other (eg, WikiNG) content-management-oriented efforts. So i have to figure out how it would fit in that frame work - maybe this suggests a way. I'm having trouble fitting my mind around it, though. Sigh. Ken klm@digicool.com
Ken Manheimer wrote:
Clearly, i agree that the absence of those things in the wiki is a problem - i state that directly in the "problems to be addressed" section! *The* thing to understand here is that we're currently in a position where neither wikis nor maillists, in themselves, provide what we need. We need to do *something* in the meanwhile, if only to bootstrap the process so we can get to the point where we have that integration. (You'd have to ask brian and the dev folk, but i think the reason we're going with wiki is because otherwise all this talk gets **lost** - noone has the time to do the transcribing, etc. At least with wikis you can preserve your thoughts and then email interested parties!)
It seems to me that there is a potential 'bridge' between the mailing lists and the wikis - The mailing list archives!
I've been challenged with how to fit the WikiNG proposal into the PTK - since the PTK is a prime digital creations content management focus, management doesn't want to dilute resource assignments with other (eg, WikiNG) content-management-oriented efforts. So i have to figure out how it would fit in that frame work - maybe this suggests a way. I'm having trouble fitting my mind around it, though. Sigh.
What if the mailing list archives were 'PTK-enabled' in such a way that it was really easy to 'promote' postings to a wiki page status (preserving the original in the archive)? What if members of dev.zope.org could automaticaly find all of their postings and add pointers from them to the relevant wikis through-the-web? Wiki pages could serve as the root document for ZDiscussions that were gatewayed into the mailing lists, as well. Hmm, if ZDiscussions and the mailing lists were gatewayed into each other, that would get you a much better archive interface almost immediately, and you could concentrate on 'promoting' ZDiscussion postings to a wiki page instead. I'm rambling, but this seems like it would work really well! HTH, Michael Bernstein.
Michael Bernstein wrote:
It seems to me that there is a potential 'bridge' between the mailing lists and the wikis - The mailing list archives!
<snip details> I like this idea a lot :-)
Hmm, if ZDiscussions and the mailing lists were gatewayed into each other, that would get you a much better archive interface almost immediately, and you could concentrate on 'promoting' ZDiscussion postings to a wiki page instead.
The email gateway is one of the major things I want to introduce in Swishdot, when I get a window to work on it again... cheers, Chris
Chris Withers wrote:
Michael Bernstein wrote:
It seems to me that there is a potential 'bridge' between the mailing lists and the wikis - The mailing list archives!
<snip details>
I like this idea a lot :-)
After some more thought, I realized that this really needs to be a three-way gateway betrween a mailing list, a 'blog, and a newsgroup. The 'blog is obviously the most different from the other two, as 'blogs usually excersize editorial control over the root items, but none (or little) over the ensuing discussion. This is markedly different from both mailing lists and newsgroups, where moderation is on all of the postings. Assuming that gets accomplished, this should take care of everyones 'discussion' needs, after which the trick is promoting certain things to permanent collaborative artefacts, like wikis. Michael Bernstein.
Michael Bernstein wrote:
After some more thought, I realized that this really needs to be a three-way gateway betrween a mailing list, a 'blog, and a newsgroup.
I'm all up for doing the mailing list/weblog type bits but I have no idea how news _works_ and how it could be integrated into the Zope environment... Any ideas? cheers, Chris
Chris Withers wrote:
Michael Bernstein wrote:
After some more thought, I realized that this really needs to be a three-way gateway betrween a mailing list, a 'blog, and a newsgroup.
I'm all up for doing the mailing list/weblog type bits but I have no idea how news _works_ and how it could be integrated into the Zope environment...
Not really, but two-way gateways between mailing lists and News servers are pretty well understood, so it should be possible to let the mailing list sit between the two, and act as a compatibility layer. What do you think? Michael.
Michael Bernstein wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
Michael Bernstein wrote:
After some more thought, I realized that this really needs to be a three-way gateway betrween a mailing list, a 'blog, and a newsgroup.
I'm all up for doing the mailing list/weblog type bits but I have no idea how news _works_ and how it could be integrated into the Zope environment...
Not really, but two-way gateways between mailing lists and News servers are pretty well understood, so it should be possible to let the mailing list sit between the two, and act as a compatibility layer.
What do you think?
Well, not sure the 'mailing list' stuff that may well end up in Swishdot will behave like a 'normal' mailing list so I'm not sure this will apply. Anyway, we'll just have to wait and see... cheers, Chris
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:24:21 -0400 (EDT), Ken Manheimer <klm@digicool.com> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 mbel44@dial.pipex.net wrote:
Since the beginning of this year DC have moved alot of debate and discussion out of mailing lists, and in to Wikis. http://www.zope.org/WikiCentral/FrontPage lists most Zope Wikis. Does anyone else find Wikis to be far less convenient than a good old mailing list?
Convenient for what?
Debate and discussion. I am particularly concerned with inception and development of projects on dev.zope.org
the wikis are just the best fit for part of the job, right now.)
Agreed; Im questioning only whether they are the best fit for *everything* they are being used for. Toby Dickenson tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com
participants (6)
-
Chris McDonough -
Chris Withers -
Ken Manheimer -
Michael Bernstein -
Toby Dickenson -
tsarnaļ¼ endicor.com