Re: Making Haskell more open

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
35 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Andrea Sassanelli
Sorry to intrude myslf like this in the conversation.
First of all, let me present myself: My name is Andrea Sassanelli, and I'm Italian. I have just started studying Haskell at the UoEdinburgh this year, and immediatelly fell in love with it.
 
On a sidenote, the wikipedia does rely on moderators who review the changes, but common users are able to undo changes as well, and can therefore bring a maliciously messed up page back to it's origiinal state. Basically MediaWiki/WikiPedia rely on the assumption that there are more good folk than bad folk, and this (IMHO) should be even more true in the case of a relatvelly "medium/small-scale" thing like the Haskell Documentation (small compared to a whole encyclopedia, i mean).
 
Open documentation like this is definitelly a good idea to make the language docs not only more accessible, but also more user-friendly, and would surely give a positive image to the community as a whole.
 
I unfortunatelly am not suted (?yet?) to work on any usefull documentation, as I am a novice, but I think the system would work.
 
 
Andrea Sassanelli

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Till Mossakowski
I have also made nice experiences with MediaWiki/WikiPedia.
However, I think while you can include images on MediaWiki pages,
you cannot include documents (like ps or pdf) - these have to be
external links. Of course, the possibility of including such documents
would be a desirable feature for a system of Haskell documentation
pages. Perhaps it is not too difficult to add this feature for
a MediaWiki expert?

Till Mossakowski

Andrea Sassanelli wrote:

> Sorry to intrude myslf like this in the conversation.
> First of all, let me present myself: My name is Andrea Sassanelli, and
> I'm Italian. I have just started studying Haskell at the UoEdinburgh
> this year, and immediatelly fell in love with it.
>  
> On a sidenote, the wikipedia does rely on moderators who review the
> changes, but common users are able to undo changes as well, and can
> therefore bring a maliciously messed up page back to it's origiinal
> state. Basically MediaWiki/WikiPedia rely on the assumption that there
> are more good folk than bad folk, and this (IMHO) should be even more
> true in the case of a relatvelly "medium/small-scale" thing like the
> Haskell Documentation (small compared to a whole encyclopedia, i mean).
>  
> Open documentation like this is definitelly a good idea to make the
> language docs not only more accessible, but also more user-friendly, and
> would surely give a positive image to the community as a whole.
>  
> I unfortunatelly am not suted (?yet?) to work on any usefull
> documentation, as I am a novice, but I think the system would work.
>  
>  
> Andrea Sassanelli
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell


--
Till Mossakowski               Phone +49-421-218-4683
Dept. of Computer Science      Fax +49-421-218-3054
University of Bremen           [hidden email]
P.O.Box 330440, D-28334 Bremen http://www.tzi.de/~till
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Ashley Yakeley
In reply to this post by Andrea Sassanelli
In article <[hidden email]>,
 Ben Moseley <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Probably the biggest example of this type of thing working well on
> a large scale is Wikipedia.

(Wikipedia uses MediaWiki.) I would much prefer to use a MediaWiki than
the existing hawiki. Particularly valuable are the elimination of
RunTogetherWordLinks and the separation of article and talk spaces. I've
set up a MediaWiki site for my own private use, and that at least wasn't
too hard. It's all PHP/MySQL.

Of course, there might be a better solution.

--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Andrea Sassanelli
In reply to this post by Till Mossakowski
Well, I in no ways am an expert, but AFAIK the system is PHP/SQL based, therefore I don't think it should be very hard to modify the upload/download system to include PDF or files of any other form for that matter.

On 11/11/05, Till Mossakowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have also made nice experiences with MediaWiki/WikiPedia.
However, I think while you can include images on MediaWiki pages,
you cannot include documents (like ps or pdf) - these have to be
external links. Of course, the possibility of including such documents
would be a desirable feature for a system of Haskell documentation
pages. Perhaps it is not too difficult to add this feature for
a MediaWiki expert?

Till Mossakowski

Andrea Sassanelli wrote:
> Sorry to intrude myslf like this in the conversation.
> First of all, let me present myself: My name is Andrea Sassanelli, and
> I'm Italian. I have just started studying Haskell at the UoEdinburgh

> this year, and immediatelly fell in love with it.
>
> On a sidenote, the wikipedia does rely on moderators who review the
> changes, but common users are able to undo changes as well, and can
> therefore bring a maliciously messed up page back to it's origiinal
> state. Basically MediaWiki/WikiPedia rely on the assumption that there
> are more good folk than bad folk, and this (IMHO) should be even more
> true in the case of a relatvelly "medium/small-scale" thing like the
> Haskell Documentation (small compared to a whole encyclopedia, i mean).
>
> Open documentation like this is definitelly a good idea to make the
> language docs not only more accessible, but also more user-friendly, and
> would surely give a positive image to the community as a whole.
>
> I unfortunatelly am not suted (?yet?) to work on any usefull
> documentation, as I am a novice, but I think the system would work.
>
>
> Andrea Sassanelli
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell


--
Till Mossakowski               Phone +49-421-218-4683
Dept. of Computer Science      Fax +49-421-218-3054
University of Bremen           [hidden email]
P.O.Box 330440, D-28334 Bremen http://www.tzi.de/~till


_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Making Haskell more open

Udo Stenzel
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley
Not that I have any emotional attachment to MoinMoin, which the hawiki
is based on, but...


Ashley Yakeley wrote:
> I would much prefer to use a MediaWiki than
> the existing hawiki. Particularly valuable are the elimination of
> RunTogetherWordLinks and the separation of article and talk spaces.

MoinMoin supports arbitrarily named links, like so: ["anything goes"].
If you set the appropriate check mark in your user preferences,
RunTogetherWords are displayed as Seperate Word for you.  Seperation of
article and discussion is a cultural, not a technical problem.


Till Mossakowski wrote:
> However, I think while you can include images on MediaWiki pages,
> you cannot include documents (like ps or pdf)

MoinMoin supports arbitrary attachments.  Just put a link named
attachment:filename into the page, then follow the new link to upload
the attachment.  If it is an image, it will even be displayed inline.
However, this feature is currently disabled.  (Why?)


What HaWiki needs is not yet another wiki engine (unless one were
written in Haskell, of course :)), but better indices.  There are too
few ways to get around (I'm always using the search features, but those
should be the last resort, not the first option) and too many orphaned
pages.


Udo.
--
A man always needs to remember one thing about a beautiful woman:
Somewhere, somebody's tired of her.

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Wolfgang Jeltsch
In reply to this post by Andrea Sassanelli
Am Donnerstag, 10. November 2005 12:27 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones:
> [...]

> - Work is afoot to move GHC's source-code repository to Darcs, to make
>   it easier for people to contribute patches

Is it planned to split the current big monolithic repository into multiple
repositories in conjunction with doing the CVS-to-darcs transition?  I'd
strongly recommend this.  What do others think?

> [...]

> * The GHC user manual [currently generated using DocBook]

I think it should continue to be written in DocBook.  (It should switch to
DocBook XML if it's still using SGML DocBook.)  XML documents are "type-safe"
in contrast to LaTeX documents, for example.  XML is well supported.  DocBook
stresses logical markup and allows very specific markup and therefore
supports conversion into different formats (HTML, PDF, ...) very well.  
Again, what do others think?

> [...]

>   Does anyone have experience of a larger-scale Wiki like this?  (A
>   few people have mentioned MediaWiki to me [MW], but I know nothing
>   about it.)

MediaWiki is the software behind Wikipedia [1] so it should be well suited for
large wikis. :-)  In addition, I like the fact that with MediaWiki you can
give articles nice names and use alternative names in link texts so you
aren't forced to write sentences like: "You can solve this problem with
MultiParameterTypeClasses." but you can write correct English sentences like:
"You can solve this problem with multi-parameter type classes."

>   How would we make sure it stayed organised?  And avoid
>   getting screwed up by malicious folk?

At Wikipedia, you can log in and modify content and you can modify content
while not being logged in.  In the first case, the history mentions your
username, in the second case, it mentions your IP address.  I think,
MediaWiki can be configured so that only logged-in users are able to do
modifications.  As far as I can remember, I once saw a site using MediaWiki,
which didn't allow modifications from non-registered users.

But honestly, would we need to protect ourselfs from malicious folk?  At
Wikipedia, they have problem with malicious people at a couple of articles,
so they sometimes have to lock articles.  (This tells us that article locking
obviously is another feature of WikiMedia.  As far as I know, this kind of
locking can be done by different persons, not just one super user.)  But who
would want to screw up pages about Haskell?

I could imagine that making the Haskell Website a wiki is a really good idea.  
At least, Wikipedia shows how much of high-quality content can evolve out of
a wiki project.

> [...]

> Simon

Best wishes,
Wolfgang

[1] http://www.wikipedia.org/
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Making Haskell more open

Wolfgang Jeltsch
In reply to this post by Andrea Sassanelli
Am Donnerstag, 10. November 2005 19:57 schrieb Ben Moseley:
> Simon Peyton-Jones <simonpj <at> microsoft.com> writes:
> >  ... And avoid
> >   getting screwed up by malicious folk?
>
> Probably the biggest example of this type of thing working well on
> a large scale is Wikipedia. I'm not intimately familiar with the process
> they use, but I believe there are a number of people who regularly
> review all the "Recent Changes" and undertake to 'undo' any
> malicious/inaccurate modifications.

I cannot imagine that a couple of people is sufficient to review all recent
changes and therefore I don't think they do it this way.  There are some
typical articles where screwing up happens often, so these articles might be
regularily revisited.  Screwing up of articles might as well be removed by
ordinary people who discover ugly things in articles by accident.

> [...]

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Making Haskell more open

Wolfgang Jeltsch
In reply to this post by Udo Stenzel
Am Freitag, 11. November 2005 12:22 schrieb Udo Stenzel:
> Seperation of article and discussion is a cultural, not a technical problem.

One thing I always disliked about the Haskell Wiki is that you often have a
short "article" and then a lot of user comments.  What people searching for
information on a certain topic mostly want is a consistent article describing
the topic, not a text with a mix of pieces certain users threw in.

> [...]

> What HaWiki needs is not yet another wiki engine

I think, the discussion was not about basing the HaWiki on a different wiki
engine but to create a new wiki which should be a replacement for the whole
Haskell website.

> [...]

> Udo.

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Making Haskell more open

Duncan Coutts
In reply to this post by Wolfgang Jeltsch
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 14:43 +0100, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:

> Am Donnerstag, 10. November 2005 19:57 schrieb Ben Moseley:
> > Simon Peyton-Jones <simonpj <at> microsoft.com> writes:
> > >  ... And avoid
> > >   getting screwed up by malicious folk?
> >
> > Probably the biggest example of this type of thing working well on
> > a large scale is Wikipedia. I'm not intimately familiar with the process
> > they use, but I believe there are a number of people who regularly
> > review all the "Recent Changes" and undertake to 'undo' any
> > malicious/inaccurate modifications.
>
> I cannot imagine that a couple of people is sufficient to review all recent
> changes and therefore I don't think they do it this way.  There are some
> typical articles where screwing up happens often, so these articles might be
> regularily revisited.  Screwing up of articles might as well be removed by
> ordinary people who discover ugly things in articles by accident.

One possability here would be to have all changes to the wiki reported
in real time (or near real time) in the #haskell IRC channel. The
#haskell lambdabot could be extended to do this.

The #haskell IRC channel is active nearly 24 hours a day and has a
membership that varies between 170 and 200. This would easily be enough
eyes to spot malicious or inaccurate changes.

This would have the added benefit of notifing people of changes on the
wiki which I imagine would prompt more contributers.

The lambdabot module to implement this scheme could do some filtering if
the notification messages prove too frequent, for example by ignoring
followup changes made to the same page by the same user within a certain
time period (since people often edit-review-edit).

Duncan

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: Making Haskell more open

Tomasz Zielonka
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:19:27PM +0000, Duncan Coutts wrote:

> > I cannot imagine that a couple of people is sufficient to review all recent
> > changes and therefore I don't think they do it this way.  There are some
> > typical articles where screwing up happens often, so these articles might be
> > regularily revisited.  Screwing up of articles might as well be removed by
> > ordinary people who discover ugly things in articles by accident.
>
> One possability here would be to have all changes to the wiki reported
> in real time (or near real time) in the #haskell IRC channel. The
> #haskell lambdabot could be extended to do this.
>
> The #haskell IRC channel is active nearly 24 hours a day and has a
> membership that varies between 170 and 200. This would easily be enough
> eyes to spot malicious or inaccurate changes.

I think that the amount of changes that need to be reviewed could be
dramatically reduced if we create some trust management system, for
example we could trust changes made by authorized users. The users
who most often contribute to the Wiki will probably be the same who care
about reviewing changes and they probably won't mind to log in, so their
changes won't have to be reviewed.

Best regards
Tomasz
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Making the haskell.org website more open with a wiki? was Re: Making Haskell more open

Shae Matijs Erisson
In reply to this post by Wolfgang Jeltsch
Wolfgang Jeltsch <[hidden email]> writes:

> Am Freitag, 11. November 2005 12:22 schrieb Udo Stenzel:
> > Seperation of article and discussion is a cultural, not a technical
> > problem.
>
> One thing I always disliked about the Haskell Wiki is that you often have a
> short "article" and then a lot of user comments.  What people searching for
> information on a certain topic mostly want is a consistent article describing
> the topic, not a text with a mix of pieces certain users threw in.

That's part of the goal of The Monad.Reader, but feel free to refactor Wiki
pages from ThreadMode into DocumentMode.

(see ThreadMode and DocumentMode on http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiModes )

> > What HaWiki needs is not yet another wiki engine
>
> I think, the discussion was not about basing the HaWiki on a different wiki
> engine but to create a new wiki which should be a replacement for the whole
> Haskell website.

If a wiki engine in Haskell is a good motivation, there's always Flippi.

My only worry with the current wiki is the licensing. There's no overall
license required for content contributed, so example code can't be directly
used in OSS or commercial projects. I'd like to freeze the wiki at some point
and create a new wiki instance with a sensible license, whether it be BSD3,
Creative Commons, Gnu FDL, or whatever fits.

Moving the existing website to a wiki will solve the problems of community
updating, searching, file attachments, and the like.

On the other hand, those same problems could also be solved by putting the
website into a darcs repository and allowing certain users to push changes.
Then anyone could send a patch to one of those certain users.
--
Shae Matijs Erisson - http://www.ScannedInAvian.com/ - Sockmonster once said:
You could switch out the unicycles for badgers, and the game would be the same.

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Ashley Yakeley
In reply to this post by Udo Stenzel
In article <[hidden email]>,
 Udo Stenzel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> MoinMoin supports arbitrarily named links, like so: ["anything goes"].

But people don't use them. It's the elimination of the other kind that's
valuable.

> If you set the appropriate check mark in your user preferences,
> RunTogetherWords are displayed as Seperate Word for you.

...which gives "Monad Plus" instead of "MonadPlus".

> Seperation of
> article and discussion is a cultural, not a technical problem.

Sure, any Wiki can be made to represent the information in any other,
just as any Haskell program can be rewritten in Visual Basic.

--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Ben Franksen-2
In reply to this post by Wolfgang Jeltsch
On Friday 11 November 2005 13:56, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:

> Am Donnerstag, 10. November 2005 12:27 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones:
> > [...]
> >
> > * The GHC user manual [currently generated using DocBook]
>
> I think it should continue to be written in DocBook.  (It should
> switch to DocBook XML if it's still using SGML DocBook.)  XML
> documents are "type-safe" in contrast to LaTeX documents, for
> example.  XML is well supported.  DocBook stresses logical markup and
> allows very specific markup and therefore supports conversion into
> different formats (HTML, PDF, ...) very well. Again, what do others
> think?

Yes. In fact I like the current GHC manual as it is.

> >   How would we make sure it stayed organised?  And avoid
> >   getting screwed up by malicious folk?
>
> At Wikipedia, you can log in and modify content and you can modify
> content while not being logged in.  In the first case, the history
> mentions your username, in the second case, it mentions your IP
> address.  I think, MediaWiki can be configured so that only logged-in
> users are able to do modifications.  As far as I can remember, I once
> saw a site using MediaWiki, which didn't allow modifications from
> non-registered users.
>
> But honestly, would we need to protect ourselfs from malicious folk?
> At Wikipedia, they have problem with malicious people at a couple of
> articles, so they sometimes have to lock articles.  (This tells us
> that article locking obviously is another feature of WikiMedia.  As
> far as I know, this kind of locking can be done by different persons,
> not just one super user.)  But who would want to screw up pages about
> Haskell?

Spambots are the worst problem, I guess.

Ben
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Ben Franksen-2
On Saturday 12 November 2005 02:30, Benjamin Franksen wrote:

> On Friday 11 November 2005 13:56, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 10. November 2005 12:27 schrieb Simon Peyton-Jones:
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > * The GHC user manual [currently generated using DocBook]
> >
> > I think it should continue to be written in DocBook.  (It should
> > switch to DocBook XML if it's still using SGML DocBook.)  XML
> > documents are "type-safe" in contrast to LaTeX documents, for
> > example.  XML is well supported.  DocBook stresses logical markup
> > and allows very specific markup and therefore supports conversion
> > into different formats (HTML, PDF, ...) very well. Again, what do
> > others think?
>
> Yes. In fact I like the current GHC manual as it is.

Sorry, that comment seems to miss the point. What I wanted to say is:
However the source format is going to be changed to better support user
contributions, I would like it to remain similar in its (processed) end
user appearance.

Ben
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Ashley Yakeley
In reply to this post by Till Mossakowski
In article <[hidden email]>,
 Till Mossakowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have also made nice experiences with MediaWiki/WikiPedia.
> However, I think while you can include images on MediaWiki pages,
> you cannot include documents (like ps or pdf) - these have to be
> external links. Of course, the possibility of including such documents
> would be a desirable feature for a system of Haskell documentation
> pages. Perhaps it is not too difficult to add this feature for
> a MediaWiki expert?

In the current shipping version, 1.5.2, you can allow uploads of PDF,
etc. by adding this to your LocalSettings.php:

    $wgCheckFileExtensions = false;
    $wgStrictFileExtensions = false;

Even with these settings, dangerous content such as .php, .js and .html
files is prevented. Uploaded PDFs work fine, and display inline as the
PDF logo.

--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Gour-2
In reply to this post by Andrea Sassanelli
Simon Peyton-Jones ([hidden email]) wrote:

Dear Simon,
> Dear Haskell folk
>
> One thing that hit me forcibly during ICFP in Tallinn, and the
> associated workshops, is that the Haskell community may not be as good
> as (say) the Perl community at engaging and involving the people "in
> the trenches" [PRL].  Haskell.org is centrally maintained by a couple of
> (excellent) people; GHC is still over-dependent on Simon and me; we
> don't yet have a good central site for offering libraries; and so on.

it is very encouraging to see that despite working on a capital Haskell
project, you are thinking about the global community as well.

> However, I still wonder if there are things we could do that would make
> it easier for people to contribute.  Here are two concrete suggestions:

[snip]

> Many of you will know much more about this kind of thing than I
> do.   Share your wisdom with the mailing list.  

In the light of your suggestions, proposals, I'll (despite being a
Haskell noob) share my ideas¹, which are based on one assumption -
haskell.org can be used as a bed for the whole thing...

¹ I'll use letter chars to denote that points are not listed according
to priorities


a) convert the whole haskell.org site into a community portal

by using some CMS (eg. Drupal - http://drupal.org/ - which is used on LTU &
Haskell Sequence sites).

By giving accounts to trusted users, creating of content can be made
much easier and we'll get a more material published in less time.

I'd like that we keep the present css style of the site (color theme)
which I find very nice and appealing, but use the Drupal's feature to
make some categories from the present homepage's links like:

        i)   A Short Introduction to Haskell can be made like About menu
        bar
        ii)  Definition of Haskell   - another category in the main menu
        bar
        iii) Books and Tutorials²   - another category
        iv)  Libraries and Tools²
        iv)  Links to Haskell-related blogs & sites
        .. ...
        xx)  Forums³

² those type of categories I'd made like e.g. http://gnomefiles.org/ &
http://www.kde-apps.org/ sites where the books/tutorials/aplications
can be catalogized according to the software type, reviewed & rated by users,
and relevant links with homepage, screenshots, version histories etc.
can be provided.
               
³ I'll mention and (try to) justify them a little bit later

The rest of the haskell.org portal site can be used for displaying
latest forum topics, important news, quick links etc.

b) make a haskell.org repository for haskell-related projects

by adding some required features so that Haskell projects can move from
e.g. SF to haskell.org. Here I'm thinking about Trac - wiki and issue tracking
system (http://projects.edgewall.com/trac/).

It is simple & powerful enough. It combines wiki (the present hawiki
entries can be imported (http://projects.edgewall.com/trac/ticket/2068)
with the ticket system handy for handling bug requests, feature
requests, setting roadmaps, timelines etc. and great thing that there is
a darcs backend available so every proejct can have darcs repository
avaialable. (this is why I prefer trac over e.g. bugzilla, RT...)

Several projects (ghc, gtk2hs) are already hosted on haskell.org, but
with the Trac it is very easy to provide SF-like features on haskell.org
with not so complicated setup & maintainance.

So projects (e.g. gtk2hs) can have their own style & features (gallery,
blog...), while other projects can use just a Trac and have a working
site with the darcs repo in practically no time (see e.g. opensync.org
site).

c) providing unified front-end for mail-archives & search

By implementing point b) several projects can move their mailing lists &
mail-archives to haskell.org and we can setup front-end for
searching/browsing all the haskell-related lists like
(see e.g. http://mail.gnome.org/archives/)


d) enhance the present wiki system

The present hawiki is very rich and provides lot of information for
haskell searchers, but it is, imho, too flat in the sense that it could
be enhanced by providing better Table Of Contents and having shorter
pages to find material more quickly.

Some of the wiki entries could find their place (link) on the portal's
homepage, in the Docs section etc.


e) forums

Several posts were regarding forums/newsgroups/mailing lists/irc and I
consider that forums can be very handy feature for the new Haskell
community portal site :-)

Let us consider the pro/cons of the present communication means:
        i)   mailing lists
                pro) - very convenient interface
                        - searchable archives
                       
                cons) - it is not easy to jump in the discussion after
                        some time
                        - it requires subscription

        ii)  #irc
                pro) - very interactive
                        - quick solutions for many problems
                       
                cons) - it can be very time-consuming (discussion can go
                        astray or nothing is happening at all)
                        - the same questions/answers are regularly
                          asked/answered
       
        iii) forum
                pro) - provides ability to have sticky posts for FAQ,
                        howtos, etc.
                        - searchable archives
                        - one can always jump in the thread by replying
                          to appropriate post (even much later than
                          original post is posted)
                        - ability to have email notification when some
                          replies are posted

The potential of newsgroup was also mentioned - creating of
compl.lang.haskell, but I won't comment of it considering that the
newsgroup cannot be one & all solution, and, otoh, does not, imho, provide any
substantial advantage over the other three forms (we already have lists
& irc, and forums come 'for free' with CMS).


f) enhancing & opening GHC manual

Besides my vote for simple authoring tool for working on GHC manual,
Drupal offers so called 'Collaborative Book' (http://drupal.org/node/284)
feature which can even export to DocBook XML in case we want to preserve its
format.


Conclusion:

The above listed proposals can help to put Haskell comunity even more
together by providing central place for sharing ideas, news,
software...and by using ticket system and having concrete timelines,
roadmaps, tasks...it will become much easier to engage people with different
skills contribute to the whole community in many ways:

        i)   writing simple patches for certain project
        ii)  becoming developer ...
        ii)  providing translation
        iii) testing
        iv)  writing documentation (manuals, tutorials...)
        v)   web design
        vi)  administration & maintenance (forums, lists...)
        vii) writing news articles...

The result of the above points would be that we can provide the strategy
for the further develpment of the whole community by:
        i)  organizing bug-days and/or bug-week to squash bugs (ghc example)
        ii) providing more man-power for the apps which are important for
        promoting Haskell as general programming language further
        iii) ...

Shortly, by having concrete strategy how to enhance/improve the whole
community (language, applications, libs, documentation) we can hope to
attract much more man-power (non-PhD users :-) & money-power (we will
also need some funds for maintaining hardware, (maybe) paying some
programmers to work full-time on certain projects etc.)

> Lastly, when it comes down to it, none of these things will happen
> unless some people volunteer to push them forward.  

David Roundy and darcs are nice example how he managed to attract lot of
people to contibute a little to the whole project.

otoh, I'm 'thankful' to Duncan for inspiring me & engaging my (not so developed) skills to contribute somehow (gtk2hs).

> Would any of you like to contribute your time and expertise?

Of course, I'm ready to help according to time & skills (not so much an
expert :-)

Huh, now it is enough, you canstart flaming me. I'm ready working on my
false-ego anyway :-)

Sincerely,
Gour

--
Registered Linux User | #278493
GPG Public Key | 8C44EDCD
 
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Wolfgang Jeltsch
Am Samstag, 12. November 2005 10:04 schrieb Gour:
> [...]

> I'd like that we keep the present css style of the site (color theme)
> which I find very nice and appealing,

The font size is way too small!

> [...]

> iii) forum
> pro) - provides ability to have sticky posts for FAQ,
> howtos, etc.
> - searchable archives
> - one can always jump in the thread by replying
>  to appropriate post (even much later than
>  original post is posted)
> - ability to have email notification when some
>  replies are posted

                cons)
                        - cumbersome usage
                        - no ability to choose own communication software

> [...]

> The potential of newsgroup was also mentioned - creating of
> compl.lang.haskell, but I won't comment of it considering that the
> newsgroup cannot be one & all solution, and, otoh, does not, imho, provide
> any substantial advantage over the other three forms (we already have lists
> & irc, and forums come 'for free' with CMS).

As long as newsgroups are not substantially worse than the three other
communication forms, you should list them.  Otherwise you could also leave
out mailing lists or, ehm, forums with the same justification.

> [...]

> f) enhancing & opening GHC manual
>
> Besides my vote for simple authoring tool for working on GHC manual,
> Drupal offers so called 'Collaborative Book' (http://drupal.org/node/284)
> feature which can even export to DocBook XML in case we want to preserve
> its format.

The question is how the DocBook documents created by Drupal look.  You can
also export Word documents as HTML but as far as I know this is not
advisable.  The main advantage of DocBook is that it uses truely logical
markup.  Logical markup is something we should keep under all circumstances.

> [...]

By the way, is Drupal Free/Open Source Software?

> [...]

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Ketil Malde
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:

>>The potential of newsgroup was also mentioned - creating of
>>compl.lang.haskell, but I won't comment of it considering that the
>>newsgroup cannot be one & all solution, and, otoh, does not, imho, provide
>>any substantial advantage over the other three forms (we already have lists
>>& irc, and forums come 'for free' with CMS).
>>    
>>
>
>As long as newsgroups are not substantially worse than the three other
>communication forms, you should list them.  Otherwise you could also leave
>out mailing lists or, ehm, forums with the same justification.
>  
>
IMO, newsgroups are substantially /better/.  You can supersede and
cancel, client software generally provide the necessary functionality
for threading, sites can get a feed and have a local mirror.

Gmane, which integrates newsgroups, mailing lists and a web front end
seems like a very good choice.

(IRC and Wiki are substantially different that integration doesn't make
much sense, IMO)

-k
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Gour-2
In reply to this post by Wolfgang Jeltsch
Wolfgang Jeltsch ([hidden email]) wrote:

> > I'd like that we keep the present css style of the site (color theme)
> > which I find very nice and appealing,
>
> The font size is way too small!

Well, in every browser I know (on Linux), you can setup your preferred
sitze for minimum and/or medium font size.

> As long as newsgroups are not substantially worse than the three other
> communication forms, you should list them.  

You did not mention what is the advantage of newsgroups over the mailing
lists, therefore I am leaving them out.

> The question is how the DocBook documents created by Drupal look.  

That should be tested, of course.

> You can also export Word documents as HTML but as far as I know this
> is not advisable.  

If the html is desired output, no need for a complex thing as Docbook.

> The main advantage of DocBook is that it uses truely logical markup.
> Logical markup is something we should keep under all circumstances.

DocBook is much richer markup language than HTML, so what is the need to
author in a complicated markup when much simpler tools can do the job?

> By the way, is Drupal Free/Open Source Software?

>From the Gentoo ebuild description:

Drupal is a PHP-based open-source platform and content management system
for building dynamic web sites offering a broad range of features and
services; including user administration, publishing workflow, discussion
capabilities, news aggregation, metadata functionalities using
controlled vocabularies and XML publishing for content sharing purposes.
Equipped with a powerful blend of features and configurability, Drupal
can support a diverse range of web projects ranging from personal
weblogs to large community-driven sites.

License:  GPL-2

Sincerely,
Gour

--
Registered Linux User | #278493
GPG Public Key | 8C44EDCD
 
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making Haskell more open

Wolfgang Jeltsch
Am Sonntag, 13. November 2005 19:21 schrieb Gour:
> Wolfgang Jeltsch ([hidden email]) wrote:
> > > I'd like that we keep the present css style of the site (color theme)
> > > which I find very nice and appealing,
> >
> > The font size is way too small!
>
> Well, in every browser I know (on Linux), you can setup your preferred
> sitze for minimum and/or medium font size.

The font size is much smaller than the font size of other webpages.  So if I
would change the default font size to give good results with the Haskell
website, all other websites would have their text in very large letters.

> [...]

> > You can also export Word documents as HTML but as far as I know this
> > is not advisable.
>
> If the html is desired output, no need for a complex thing as Docbook.

What I wanted to illustrate is the fact that being able to export in certain
format doesn't necessarily mean that this is worthwhile.

> > The main advantage of DocBook is that it uses truely logical markup.
> > Logical markup is something we should keep under all circumstances.
>
> DocBook is much richer markup language than HTML, so what is the need to
> author in a complicated markup when much simpler tools can do the job?

The question is if HTML is sufficient.  In addition, HTML is at some points
not well thought-out.

> [...]

> Sincerely,
> Gour

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
12