Revision history for WikkaReleaseNotesDiscussion


Revision [22937]

Last edited on 2016-05-20 07:38:42 by JavaWoman [Replaces old-style internal links with new pipe-split links.]
Additions:
~~~&''My 2 cents. On the one hand, I agree with JW as far as //readability// is concerned: it is much better to have a formatted version, with headers etc., possibly with links, than a plain-text version (the first thing I thought when I saw the SandBox page full of raw text was : "gosh, the formatters are broken!"). This said, there is a question that none of you has mentioned so far. How are we going to deal with //internal links// that are present in the current WikkaReleaseNotes page? Either we distribute a version of WikkaReleaseNotes with no internal links and no camelcase words left or we have to think of a solution to avoid generating a ton of missing pages. IMO, one interesting solution (which might require some futher development, though) is to use a [[IncludeRemote | FetchRemote]] strategy to retrieve fresh and uptodate documentation on the new release from the main server (JsnX, have you tried to install the plugin locally?). This has the advantage of avoiding writing a hardcoded page in the user's database and - as Jason was suggesting - let the user free to decide where to add the release notes (it is just a matter of adding somewhere ##""{{fetchremote page="WikkaReleaseNotes")""##). On the other hand, I was wondering: is there really a problem with //overwriting// an existing page? Provided the installer says explicitly it is going to overwrite one page, this page will be nothing more than a //version// of the page (that's the power of wikis!): if a note is added like "updated by the Wikka installer", the user will always be able to retrieve previous versions of the same page if needed. So I don't really think that overwriting is a problem. -- DarTar''
This server runs on [[[http://wikka.jsnx.com/ | Wikka Wiki]] version **{{version}}**.
The new features of the current version are described on the [[http://wikka.jsnx.com/WikkaReleaseNotes | main Wikka server]]%%
Deletions:
~~~&''My 2 cents. On the one hand, I agree with JW as far as //readability// is concerned: it is much better to have a formatted version, with headers etc., possibly with links, than a plain-text version (the first thing I thought when I saw the SandBox page full of raw text was : "gosh, the formatters are broken!"). This said, there is a question that none of you has mentioned so far. How are we going to deal with //internal links// that are present in the current WikkaReleaseNotes page? Either we distribute a version of WikkaReleaseNotes with no internal links and no camelcase words left or we have to think of a solution to avoid generating a ton of missing pages. IMO, one interesting solution (which might require some futher development, though) is to use a [[IncludeRemote FetchRemote]] strategy to retrieve fresh and uptodate documentation on the new release from the main server (JsnX, have you tried to install the plugin locally?). This has the advantage of avoiding writing a hardcoded page in the user's database and - as Jason was suggesting - let the user free to decide where to add the release notes (it is just a matter of adding somewhere ##""{{fetchremote page="WikkaReleaseNotes")""##). On the other hand, I was wondering: is there really a problem with //overwriting// an existing page? Provided the installer says explicitly it is going to overwrite one page, this page will be nothing more than a //version// of the page (that's the power of wikis!): if a note is added like "updated by the Wikka installer", the user will always be able to retrieve previous versions of the same page if needed. So I don't really think that overwriting is a problem. -- DarTar''
This server runs on [[[http://wikka.jsnx.com/ Wikka Wiki]] version **{{version}}**.
The new features of the current version are described on the [[http://wikka.jsnx.com/WikkaReleaseNotes main Wikka server]]%%


Revision [18273]

Edited on 2008-01-28 00:10:56 by JavaWoman [Modified links pointing to docs server]

No Differences

Revision [5634]

Edited on 2005-02-04 19:26:07 by JavaWoman [layout]
Additions:
=====Discussion about adding WikkaReleaseNotes at the time of installation=====
~&Why not adding WikkaReleaseNotes as a default page (or at least the section on what's new in the last version). As an alternative, (minimal solution) we might add a link to the WikkaReleaseNotes page on the wikka server;
~~&I'd wager that the average Wikka owner does not care as much as you and I do about the release notes. Have you noticed that the majority of Wikka sites that have been around for a while have never upgraded? Anyhow, how about an alternative:
~~&We can still have a page named WikkaReleaseNotes, but we bring back what Wakka used to do. Create an action named wikkachanges. This action will display a file in the docs directory named CHANGES.txt. We then put the action in the WikkaReleaseNotes page. This way we cover two areas: admins who have just downloaded the distribution file, and online users who want to see the changes. The wikkachanges action is live on this site right now. Try it.
Deletions:
=====Discussion about adding WikkaReleaseNotes ast the time of installation=====
~&-Why not adding WikkaReleaseNotes as a default page (or at least the section on what's new in the last version). As an alternative, (minimal solution) we might add a link to the WikkaReleaseNotes page on the wikka server;
~~&-I'd wager that the average Wikka owner does not care as much as you and I do about the release notes. Have you noticed that the majority of Wikka sites that have been around for a while have never upgraded? Anyhow, how about an alternative:
~~&- We can still have a page named WikkaReleaseNotes, but we bring back what Wakka used to do. Create an action named wikkachanges. This action will display a file in the docs directory named CHANGES.txt. We then put the action in the WikkaReleaseNotes page. This way we cover two areas: admins who have just downloaded the distribution file, and online users who want to see the changes. The wikkachanges action is live on this site right now. Try it.


Revision [5586]

The oldest known version of this page was created on 2005-02-04 15:14:15 by NilsLindenberg [layout]
Valid XHTML :: Valid CSS: :: Powered by WikkaWiki