home home

shots shots

downloads files

forum forum

docs docs

wiki wiki

faq faq

Cube & Cube 2 FORUM

Cube Wiki, revisited

by Aardappel_ on 07/13/2006 02:18, 39 messages, last message: 08/18/2006 23:33, 7306 views, last view: 08/09/2020 03:59

Many of you know that we had a Wiki, which I hosted on strlen.com, which got attacked by link farm bots to the point that it was unusable. I killed the wiki, preserving most of its content.

But the recent talk about documentation made me realize that we NEED a wiki. There is a lot of knowledge floating around between community members, and we are repeating ourselves. And updating the docs to cover everything from every angle is impossible... besides, a wiki is fun!

But not like last time. I don't want to host it myself anymore, so we don't have administration/security issues. Also, I don't want an FFA wiki, I want to give only known community members write access.

So in this thread, give your suggestions. First of all the question is which "hosted wiki" to go with. I have the following requirements:

1. must allow me to give write access to specific users only
2. must allow me to easily export the entire wiki as a set of static HTML pages (such that it can be included in the distribution as documentation).
3. the host must be a company that is reasonably "well established", i.e. doesn't give us the trouble that in a year it suddenly goes under etc.
4. It must be free
5. If any ads, preferably only google ads.

Some ones that may be good:

http://www.jot.com/ - has tons of cool features
http://www.wikispaces.com/ - nice and streamlined
http://wikia.com/ - very nice, but doesn't seem to support requirement 1 :(

I haven't been able to find out if any of these support requirement 2...

Go to first 20 messagesGo to previous 20 messages    Board Index   

#20: Re: lets get going...

by >driAn<. on 07/28/2006 21:40, refers to #17


reply to this message

#21: woohoo

by Aardappel_ on 08/11/2006 20:51

so, the wiki on http://cube.wikispaces.com/ is off to a good start. Here are some general comments on how we can make it better:

Do not be afraid to refactor things. Sofar it seems people just ADD to the wiki, and leave what is there in place. One of the ideas behind a wiki is that its easy to reorganize the soup of data. If you add something that makes the structure of the document less than ideal, do not be afraid to restructure other peoples text into a different set of pages and links. Do not be afraid to even delete other people's text, once you conclude it has become redundant. The original structure was just me making some example pages, it may not be ideal for the current contents anymore.

Feel free to discuss in this thread if you have major restructurings in mind, or certain conventions.

Don't let pages grow to huge amounts of text, wiki's are best when they are small sections of text per page, but HEAVILY linked.

In that same way, one of the goals of the wiki is to function as a FAQ, so if we get the 1001th post on "your server did not reply to ping" we can point people to exactly one wiki page that has all the firewall tutorials you could ever wish for.

Some stuff on the wiki is straight out of the main documentation. Duplication is not good, it means if I update the main documentation the wiki instantly contains outdated information. Since the wiki is more for FAQ/tutorial kinda stuff, and the docs more for hardcore factual reference, it is good to have each section of the wiki refer to pages in the docs where the exact command reference related to the topic can be found.

If you know of topics that have been discussed on this forum before, it is really helpfull to find these threads, and make a wikipage out of the most explanatory posts. Infact, maybe I should be typing this post in the wiki rather than on the forum, it is getting rather long... :)

If additional people want editing access, apply for it on the wiki page.

I will make sure it is linked from the various web pages soon, that should ensure more traffic.

reply to this message

#22: Re: woohoo

by shadow,516 on 08/11/2006 21:20, refers to #21

that reminds me... the readme.html wont open in IE7 :(

reply to this message

#23: Re: woohoo

by kurtis84 on 08/12/2006 00:28, refers to #21

Ok, I've finally got around to looking at this wiki thing...a good idea indeed. I've applied to join on the site, and I can see a few things I would like to add in there. I would hope that all the time I've burned mapping could produce some good tutorials, and/or tips for new mappers, and players.

reply to this message

#24: IE7?!

by Greywhind on 08/12/2006 01:27

Why the hell are you using IE 7? Get ANY other web browser! They're free!

Unless you're on a computer where you can't download anything, in which case I understand and feel your pain.

reply to this message

#25: ..

by makkE on 08/12/2006 01:40

Kurtis, I think your help is much appreciated, since you got to be one of the most experienced sauer mappers :)

reply to this message

#26: Re: woohoo

by pushplay on 08/12/2006 03:37, refers to #22

More importantly IE7 is beta so it's not our problem.

reply to this message

#27: Re: IE7?!

by Passa on 08/12/2006 04:03, refers to #24

"Unless you're on a computer where you can't download anything"

Then why would he need a browser?

IE7 is much better than IE6. So don't put them in the same boat.. BUT its BETA and buggy, messes up Steam (try play CS 1.6 with IE7).

Anywho, get Opera, or Firefox. I would use Opera but I don't like its configuration menus and a few other things at that (I'm fussy).

Ontopic; yeah I think that kurtis, being easily the best Sauerbraten mapper atm, would be a great asset to writing articles etc in the wiki. I also think meatrome would be a great help with that wiki stuff. I might add some stuff on server hosting myself..

reply to this message

#28: Re: Participation

by MeatROme on 08/12/2006 12:06, refers to #27

I'm on the wiki already :)
Thanks for your trust in me!

The scripting issues is what I'm focussing on ATM ... but it's progressing veeeery slowly and is currently still too much a copy of the original docs.
Maybe that is what aard was talking about a couple of posts up!?!

Never fear - the concept is still budding on me and I still have plans that will restructure those pages some more ... I'm trying to "go with the flow".

reply to this message

#29: Re: IE7?!

by shadow,516 on 08/12/2006 16:09, refers to #24

I actually LIKE IE7 (yes, better than firefox or opera), so don't push it.

I've tried them all, and with a greasemonkey port for IE7, I have no reason to use Opera or Firefox.

reply to this message

#30: Amen, Praxtibel.

by Greywhind on 08/12/2006 23:17

Title says it all.

reply to this message

#31: Re: IE7?!

by shadow,516 on 08/13/2006 01:58, refers to #30

umm... deal with it?

reply to this message

#32: Re: IE7?!

by Passa on 08/13/2006 02:10, refers to #31

Linux users are just lazy.
Its not Windows fault its so popular its victimised by virus makers..

reply to this message

#33: Re: IE7?!

by kurtis84 on 08/16/2006 01:39, refers to #33

this is off-topic here, but..
prax: I too have this cookie problem with this forum ( my cookies all work fine in every other site they are needed ).

I just close my browser, and reopen it...usually doesn't take more than a couple times, and out of nowhere, my cookie is working again.

makes no damn sense to me at all

I am running winxp, and this site doesn't work at all with IE since a few updates back, I'm not wasting my time going through IE's preferences and security settings every damn update...I use firefox, so I don't mind that.

reply to this message

#34: license problem

by drian@job001 on 08/18/2006 12:35

The wiki content license may cause problems if we add general engine docs like the command reference to the wiki. Assume someone uses the engine for his own XY project and added and modified some scripting commands, then he must not take the command ref from the wiki and change it to fit his own project as the no-derivative-works clause doesn't allow this:

- No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.


This isn't a problem at the moment. But keep in mind that the wiki content and the number of editors may grow and suddenly it becomes hard to change the license as you need the agreement of every participating editor (=copyright holder).

Another way would be an agreement for all editors to assign their copyright to you (aard). So you can control who gets permission to alter the wiki content for own projects.

Just a thought.

reply to this message

#35: Re: license problem

by Aardappel_ on 08/18/2006 19:06, refers to #34

I have just changed it from no-derivative to share-alike. Is that cool with all contributors?

reply to this message

#36: Re: license problem

by shadow,516 on 08/18/2006 19:16, refers to #35

sounds good to me

reply to this message

#37: ..

by makkE on 08/18/2006 22:36

Yes thatīs good.

reply to this message

#38: license

by MeatROme on 08/18/2006 22:44

fine by me

reply to this message

#39: guideline suggestion

by >driAn<. on 08/18/2006 23:33

Feedback is welcome.

reply to this message

Go to first 20 messagesGo to previous 20 messages    Board Index   

Unvalidated accounts can only reply to the 'Permanent Threads' section!

content by Aardappel & eihrul © 2001-2020
website by SleepwalkR © 2001-2020
34519781 visitors requested 49442200 pages
page created in 0.013 seconds using 10 queries
hosted by Boost Digital