[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: What is the purpose of a Docs CMS?

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 12:28:54AM +0800, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 21:46 +0530, Mani A wrote:
> > 
> > I think any good CMS would lessen the burden on the doc team
> > considerably and improve work flow (in comparison with a wiki based
> > system).
> > Contributors may also have a more polished interface to use.

I don't think we can nor want to replace wiki functionality.  There is
something different about a wiki that makes it work better at what it
does than a traditional CMS approach.  "All open to everyone in the
community to edit," is really a powerful proposition that a CMS cannot
easily beat.  MediaWiki is the best tool at this, I think our
relationship with that tool is going to go on for years.

> How about rather than looking for an end-all be all solution, we find
> more than one tool that can all be used together.  For example, one part
> of the toolchain may be the wiki, while another part may be a
> docbook-to-wiki tool, and another could be a DocBook editor...I don't
> know what would really work, but it's an idea that may be easier than
> finding one software package that does EVERYTHING.

This is what I believe we are trying to do.  *Add* a CMS as a
publishing tool to the end of parts that exist and work well.

* Collaborative writing and editing en masse:  Wiki

* Collaborative writing and editing of larger guides by a team:  Wiki
  then DocBook as a hosted project

* Translation: Transifex

* DocBook toolchain:  Publican

* Publishing tool:  CMS

If the CMS does the other jobs better, and we love it and people are
using it, then sure, we can switch to that.  That's a good problem,
not a bad one.

- Karsten
Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener

Attachment: pgpbdp8xwIW0f.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]