Hello All,
Today is my last official day as the openSUSE wiki system administrator. I wanted to write to this mailing list to express my appreciation for all of the wonderful people on the wiki team and for the work that they have done in improving the openSUSE community. There have been a number of challenges and disagreements along the way, and we still have a long way to go, but I feel that we have managed to come together in delivering a world-class knowledge solution for the community.
The subject of this message is a little misleading, as this is not truly a farewell. I plan to continue on as a wiki contributor, and possibly even as a developer. I will also probably help out on the system administration side of things until the new engineer gets up to speed on the www and wiki architecture.
Like many of you, I believe that openSUSE is the most solid (not to mention the best looking) Linux distribution out there, and I am proud to have been able to contribute to the project in my own small way.
Thank you,
-Matt
Hello,
searching to have a glance at GNOME 3, I didn't found any wiki page
about it (just annouced as 11.4 content, but no HOWTO), so I managed
to have it and document it.
http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME_SHELL
That said I have some problemps with this page:
1) I'm french and I can only guess the english menu names
2) I'm kde centric :-( and I don't know how to acess Gnome shell from
*gdm* (the login manager) - with kdm there is a bottom left menu, is
this the same with gdm?
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
Hello everybody.
I was trying to update a page in the wiki and when hitting the save
changes button I came up with a message "no permission to edit this
page, you have to login". After that I tried to login again... success.
Clicking everywhere else kicked my out. What's going on?
Hope it's the right place to post this.
Thank's for your time,
Efstathios Agrapidis (efagra)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
Do we have a good way to write documents that address the fact that the
document contents may be anywhere from identical to very different to
completely N/A depending on the version of SUSE you are talking about?
It seems to me the best answer might require some fancy programming in
the wiki to do something like this:
Have the wiki "know" what the current version(s) of suse are at any
given moment, current meaning I guess, one for opensuse and one for SLE.
Have the wiki be able to tag documents as to the version(s) they pertain to.
Have a sidebar widget or dashboard item or other consistent interface
item that allows the user to select what context they're interested in,
and it defaults to current.
When a new article is created, it is created in whatever context the
user had selected, defaulting to current again.
When the current version changes, articles do not automatically get
updated to apply to the new current context by default. Links to old
articles will still work, but they will be clearly identified as being
old. The wiki interface will make it apparent that the current selected
context is 11.4 but this article doesn't exist for 11.4, so you are
seeing the most recent version that does exist which is, say 11.2.
Or, if the user has currently selected 11.2 context specifically, then
no special warnings in the surrounding wiki interface.
Code could automate away most of the drudge work of updating an article
to the next context by having a button to copy it and the user could
make whatever changes the normal way if any, and an admin can ok it the
normal way.
The point would be, rather than have the bulk of articles go stale and
be wrong by default, Instead by default they stay always correct for the
context they are in. Users still find them the same as always even if
they are old. The same exact url's will work the same way, just what
happens in the wiki is it tries the current context, then falls back to
older ones if not there. And the user knows in an intuitive at-a-glance
way that they are looking at old stuff that may only be roughly correct.
Conversely, if they have a 10.3 box they need to work on, they
specifically do _not_ want the most current info but the info that
applied as of 10.3.
And for the author I think it simplifies the problem of trying to either
write for all the different targets, or write for just one target. I
don't want to write a document that will essentially be wrong by default
next month, nor can I reasonably keep updating everything I write
forever. And even if I did that I don't want to either lose the old info
nor have a document that grows forever as it tries to account for new
contexts.
Sounds pretty fancy I know, but all the ususal ways of dealing with this
I've seen so far are so messy. Articles that either make no attempt to
address the existence of other versions besides whatever was true at the
time of writing, or articles that are always updated to current, or
articles that have a mess of essentially verbal case/esac statements all
through them making a large confusing document for even the most simple
of topics.
I guess an individual document author could almost do this themselves in
a manual way right now by just incorporating the applicable version in
the page name, and having an unversioned main page that just has links
to the versioned pages. But that requires some significant forethought
and discipline organization on the part of the author that the wiki
could really be providing automatically and by default.
--
bkw
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
At
http://en.opensuse.org/FAQ#Is_there_any_documentation_available_for_AppArmo…
It says:
Is there any documentation available for AppArmor?
See AppArmor wiki page.
In red, no link. The correct link is:
http://wiki.apparmor.net/index.php/Main_Page
Please some one change it.
Which is funny, it says that only users are allowed write access, and I'm
listed in the list of users... is that a new bug?
http://en.opensuse.org/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&dir=prev&offset=Sa…
- --
Cheers,
Carlos Robinson
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAk2bzTsACgkQtTMYHG2NR9Vf3gCfWAn39Q687LN7ZG93oQm1yTQ4
R1QAn16U+r15kQR+J/FZ6QwEPor37y75
=+2Rn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
On 04/05/2011 10:51 PM, Brian K. White wrote:
> On 4/5/2011 1:15 PM, Malcolm wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 13:01 -0400, Brian K. White wrote:
>>> google: "insserv_cleanup"
>>>
>>> Top/First link, and in fact most of the whole first PAGE of results, is:
>>>
>>> http://old.nabble.com/What-does-rpm-macro--insserv_cleanup-do-td26784739.ht…
>>>
>>> Which refers to:
>>>
>>> http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Init_Scripts
>>>
>>> Which doesn't exist.
>>>
>>> Sure the referrer is a mail list thread which should be considered
>>> transient.
>>>
>>> That doesn't change the fact that almost the whole first page of google
>>> results for a basic term are broken.
>>>
>> Hi
>> We all know that these links are broken since the wiki changes....
>>
>> You can always add the old, or go to the proper place
>> http://old-en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Init_Scripts
>>
>> or go to the proper place
>> http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Conventions_RPM_Macros
>>
>> I always go here now;
>> http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Development/Topics
>>
>> You might also want to use http://search.opensuse.org/ which is very
>> cool.
>>
>
> Missing the point? Or just ignoring it?
>
> Of course we all know the links are broken and why.
> Of course we all know there are other ways to get the info.
> Of course it's old news.
>
> But being old news does not make the problem go away. It's still bad today despite being old news. Every new day it's bad all over again just like the first day.
> I'm sorry it's annoying to keep hearing the same complaint, but everyone else suffers the breakage anew every day so why shouldn't the breakers suffer the complaint anew every day as long as their
> damage keeps being a problem? It's not like this was some natural disaster or accident. It was an conscious and voluntary act. But forget me, the breakage hurts SUSE anew every day rather a lot more
> than myself or any single user. Countless broken links with suse's name on them do not make a good impression to people searching for answers to problems and finding only a broken link, when they are
> already in a poor state of mind from whatever the problem is they were having that sent them googling for answers.
>
> The point is that the people that broke everything don't seem to think that this is somehow bad. They say "gee just report the breaks".
>
> I say that's completely stupid, but ok fine here is yet another one.
>
> There are not merely many, but literally countless, as in there is no way to count them, and far too scattered for that to be even remotely possible. You can't find all the references to the old wiki
> that have been put into other documents in the world. We're not just talking other web pages but countless internal company documents, printed books and hard copies, personal notes and scripts and
> install media and livecd's and programs and support db's ...
>
> There was and still is a way for users to help fix everything, but it's not useful as there there is no way to know what needs to be fixed. It's an open ended forever job with no way to know when
> you're done. They pulled the trigger and switched more or less at random, after the new wiki had been up "a while" and "a lot" of stuff had been remapped, and "not many" or "no major" reports of gaps.
> All nice subjective meaningless terms in place of useful quanta.
>
> But a couple things ARE possible.
>
> It IS possible to know what are all the urls the old wiki provides and ensure they all work in some fashion before switching. A big job but a finite and knowable one and the largest part of which can
> be farmed out to users. The wiki admins can write and run a program to trawl the old wiki db and associated web pages and cgi's and compile a list of all possible old urls. Users and admins can then
> all work on that list until it's gone.
>
> Even easier than that, why isn't the 404 page simply trying old-en on the fly for every request that doesn't exist in the new wiki? It could try swapping in old-en, and if the result exists and isn't
> old-en's 404, then transparently serve up the old-en page and log the discovery in a bugzilla or or other db that not only admins but users could work on. It could even keep a hit counter for each
> miss/hit so you'd know which articles to fix first. As a natural by-product that would also have the appearance of fixing all the internal links within the old wiki too as well as external ones.
>
I think that's a very good idea. We could try to create a mediawiki extension for the
404 page that checks if it's available in old-en and point the user to it,
explaining the situation. Added to my TODO, can someone help in implementing this?
Greetings
--
Thomas Schmidt (tom [at] opensuse.org)
openSUSE Boosters Team
"Don't Panic", Douglas Adams (1952 - 11.05.2001)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
On 4/5/2011 5:03 PM, Tom Black wrote:
> That's a really good idea, Brian. Can you set that up for us all?
A) Why ask me? Did I break it?
B) But even so, setting aside the obvious simple fact that I don't work
for suse or admin that site, sure no problem. What part do you think
would be so hard?
I'm not especially a web guy at all, I can barely spell "ajax", but
along with eleventy-seven other general sysadmin/developer type things I
have to do every day I have to write the occasional cgi or php. I could
bang out a little proof of concept of the auto-404-redirect&report thing
out of bash and a flat text file in, I don't know, an hour? three?. It's
trivial.
The time to have done the other more exhaustive idea was before breaking
all the existing links, or else don't break them.
--
bkw
>
> Tom Black, RHCSA
> Web Services, University of Arkansas School of Law
> 173 Waterman Hall, Fayetteville, AR 72774
> Phone: (479) 575-2100, Fax: (479) 575-7442, Cell: (479) 935-5296
> http://law.uark.edu
>
>
> On 04/05/2011 03:51 PM, Brian K. White wrote:
>> On 4/5/2011 1:15 PM, Malcolm wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 13:01 -0400, Brian K. White wrote:
>>>> google: "insserv_cleanup"
>>>>
>>>> Top/First link, and in fact most of the whole first PAGE of results,
>>>> is:
>>>>
>>>> http://old.nabble.com/What-does-rpm-macro--insserv_cleanup-do-td26784739.ht…
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which refers to:
>>>>
>>>> http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Init_Scripts
>>>>
>>>> Which doesn't exist.
>>>>
>>>> Sure the referrer is a mail list thread which should be considered
>>>> transient.
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't change the fact that almost the whole first page of google
>>>> results for a basic term are broken.
>>>>
>>> Hi
>>> We all know that these links are broken since the wiki changes....
>>>
>>> You can always add the old, or go to the proper place
>>> http://old-en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Init_Scripts
>>>
>>> or go to the proper place
>>> http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Conventions_RPM_Macros
>>>
>>> I always go here now;
>>> http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Development/Topics
>>>
>>> You might also want to use http://search.opensuse.org/ which is very
>>> cool.
>>>
>>
>> Missing the point? Or just ignoring it?
>>
>> Of course we all know the links are broken and why.
>> Of course we all know there are other ways to get the info.
>> Of course it's old news.
>>
>> But being old news does not make the problem go away. It's still bad
>> today despite being old news. Every new day it's bad all over again
>> just like the first day.
>> I'm sorry it's annoying to keep hearing the same complaint, but
>> everyone else suffers the breakage anew every day so why shouldn't the
>> breakers suffer the complaint anew every day as long as their damage
>> keeps being a problem? It's not like this was some natural disaster or
>> accident. It was an conscious and voluntary act. But forget me, the
>> breakage hurts SUSE anew every day rather a lot more than myself or
>> any single user. Countless broken links with suse's name on them do
>> not make a good impression to people searching for answers to problems
>> and finding only a broken link, when they are already in a poor state
>> of mind from whatever the problem is they were having that sent them
>> googling for answers.
>>
>> The point is that the people that broke everything don't seem to think
>> that this is somehow bad. They say "gee just report the breaks".
>>
>> I say that's completely stupid, but ok fine here is yet another one.
>>
>> There are not merely many, but literally countless, as in there is no
>> way to count them, and far too scattered for that to be even remotely
>> possible. You can't find all the references to the old wiki that have
>> been put into other documents in the world. We're not just talking
>> other web pages but countless internal company documents, printed
>> books and hard copies, personal notes and scripts and install media
>> and livecd's and programs and support db's ...
>>
>> There was and still is a way for users to help fix everything, but
>> it's not useful as there there is no way to know what needs to be
>> fixed. It's an open ended forever job with no way to know when you're
>> done. They pulled the trigger and switched more or less at random,
>> after the new wiki had been up "a while" and "a lot" of stuff had been
>> remapped, and "not many" or "no major" reports of gaps. All nice
>> subjective meaningless terms in place of useful quanta.
>>
>> But a couple things ARE possible.
>>
>> It IS possible to know what are all the urls the old wiki provides and
>> ensure they all work in some fashion before switching. A big job but a
>> finite and knowable one and the largest part of which can be farmed
>> out to users. The wiki admins can write and run a program to trawl the
>> old wiki db and associated web pages and cgi's and compile a list of
>> all possible old urls. Users and admins can then all work on that list
>> until it's gone.
>>
>> Even easier than that, why isn't the 404 page simply trying old-en on
>> the fly for every request that doesn't exist in the new wiki? It could
>> try swapping in old-en, and if the result exists and isn't old-en's
>> 404, then transparently serve up the old-en page and log the discovery
>> in a bugzilla or or other db that not only admins but users could work
>> on. It could even keep a hit counter for each miss/hit so you'd know
>> which articles to fix first. As a natural by-product that would also
>> have the appearance of fixing all the internal links within the old
>> wiki too as well as external ones.
>>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 16:51 -0400, Brian K. White wrote:
> On 4/5/2011 1:15 PM, Malcolm wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 13:01 -0400, Brian K. White wrote:
> >> google: "insserv_cleanup"
> >>
> >> Top/First link, and in fact most of the whole first PAGE of results, is:
> >>
> >> http://old.nabble.com/What-does-rpm-macro--insserv_cleanup-do-td26784739.ht…
> >>
> >> Which refers to:
> >>
> >> http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Init_Scripts
> >>
> >> Which doesn't exist.
> >>
> >> Sure the referrer is a mail list thread which should be considered
> >> transient.
> >>
> >> That doesn't change the fact that almost the whole first page of google
> >> results for a basic term are broken.
> >>
> > Hi
> > We all know that these links are broken since the wiki changes....
> >
> > You can always add the old, or go to the proper place
> > http://old-en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Init_Scripts
> >
> > or go to the proper place
> > http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Conventions_RPM_Macros
> >
> > I always go here now;
> > http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Development/Topics
> >
> > You might also want to use http://search.opensuse.org/ which is very
> > cool.
> >
>
> Missing the point? Or just ignoring it?
>
> Of course we all know the links are broken and why.
> Of course we all know there are other ways to get the info.
> Of course it's old news.
>
> But being old news does not make the problem go away. It's still bad
> today despite being old news. Every new day it's bad all over again just
> like the first day.
> I'm sorry it's annoying to keep hearing the same complaint, but everyone
> else suffers the breakage anew every day so why shouldn't the breakers
> suffer the complaint anew every day as long as their damage keeps being
> a problem? It's not like this was some natural disaster or accident. It
> was an conscious and voluntary act. But forget me, the breakage hurts
> SUSE anew every day rather a lot more than myself or any single user.
> Countless broken links with suse's name on them do not make a good
> impression to people searching for answers to problems and finding only
> a broken link, when they are already in a poor state of mind from
> whatever the problem is they were having that sent them googling for
> answers.
>
> The point is that the people that broke everything don't seem to think
> that this is somehow bad. They say "gee just report the breaks".
>
> I say that's completely stupid, but ok fine here is yet another one.
>
> There are not merely many, but literally countless, as in there is no
> way to count them, and far too scattered for that to be even remotely
> possible. You can't find all the references to the old wiki that have
> been put into other documents in the world. We're not just talking other
> web pages but countless internal company documents, printed books and
> hard copies, personal notes and scripts and install media and livecd's
> and programs and support db's ...
>
> There was and still is a way for users to help fix everything, but it's
> not useful as there there is no way to know what needs to be fixed. It's
> an open ended forever job with no way to know when you're done. They
> pulled the trigger and switched more or less at random, after the new
> wiki had been up "a while" and "a lot" of stuff had been remapped, and
> "not many" or "no major" reports of gaps. All nice subjective
> meaningless terms in place of useful quanta.
>
> But a couple things ARE possible.
>
> It IS possible to know what are all the urls the old wiki provides and
> ensure they all work in some fashion before switching. A big job but a
> finite and knowable one and the largest part of which can be farmed out
> to users. The wiki admins can write and run a program to trawl the old
> wiki db and associated web pages and cgi's and compile a list of all
> possible old urls. Users and admins can then all work on that list until
> it's gone.
>
> Even easier than that, why isn't the 404 page simply trying old-en on
> the fly for every request that doesn't exist in the new wiki? It could
> try swapping in old-en, and if the result exists and isn't old-en's 404,
> then transparently serve up the old-en page and log the discovery in a
> bugzilla or or other db that not only admins but users could work on. It
> could even keep a hit counter for each miss/hit so you'd know which
> articles to fix first. As a natural by-product that would also have the
> appearance of fixing all the internal links within the old wiki too as
> well as external ones.
>
Hi
No, I don't think I'm missing the point. But I don't see how one updates
a mailing list archive with the corrected link, likewise any other posts
on a newsgroup/mailing list archive to be updated?
I think if a user comes across a link that is not up to date, then isn't
the idea behind a wiki to login and update?
--
Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11 (x86_64) Kernel 2.6.32.29-0.3-default
up 1 day 18:54, 3 users, load average: 0.07, 0.35, 0.54
GPU GeForce 8600 GTS Silent - Driver Version: 260.19.26
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
I have same problem. it is happen always since yesterday.
my steps for reproduce:
1 - click Sign up or Login
2 - enter login and password? ok
3 - I see page when i logined
4 - click any link in wiki for go to other page
5 - I see page when i not logined
I ask on russian IRC сhannel, I not alone with this problem.
I have equally problem both English and Russian wikis.
At first time, i try login in russian wiki. If you can login, may be bug
no relate english wiki
also i tried remove cookies and other, and i tried use other browser, i
always logout.
P.S. Sorry for my english
--
Gankov Andrey
Mail:gankov.andrey@inbox.ru
ICQ: 230-684-976
Jabber:gankov@jabber.ru
Tel: +7-911-914-01-91
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-wiki+help(a)opensuse.org
