there is a feature request for this upstream but it seems they are not very interested in this feature - mostly because pagure already has a documentation feature - the only significant difference is that wikis allow any random user to easily edit your documentation in place with no peer review - IMHO that is an anti-feature
however some users have asked for this, so for completeness i will note that the pagure docs support plaint text, HTML, markdown, and python RST format - so what is shown on the "docs" pages actually is a markdown renderer which already supports .md markdown - pagure issues have markdown editing/preview so perhaps most of the relevant parts are in place already
there is a feature request for this upstream but it seems they are not very interested in this feature - mostly because pagure already has a documentation feature - the only significant difference is that wikis allow any random user to easily edit your documentation in place with no peer review - IMHO that is an anti-feature
however some users have asked for this, so for completeness i will note that the pagure docs support plaint text, HTML, markdown, and [python RST format](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReStructuredText#Examples_of_reST_markup) - so what is shown on the "docs" pages actually is a markdown renderer which already supports .md markdown - pagure issues have markdown editing/preview so perhaps most of the relevant parts are in place already
upstream issue --> https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/1221
The doc system currently in place already allows collaboration, it's in a git repo, it can be placed in the sources of the project (cf the doc of pagure itself) or just as another project on pagure.
This is a good point. Maybe the reason why people want "Wikis" is because the docs can be edited from the web UI and pages have links between them? Not sure...
As for the iframe aspect, if you know a way to displaying user's provided data without compromising on security, I am all hears :)
To display users data they should probably consider one of those "HTML purifier" things. Given that it's Python, there has got to be a module for this :-)
> The doc system currently in place already allows collaboration, it's in a git repo, it can be placed in the sources of the project (cf the doc of pagure itself) or just as another project on pagure.
This is a good point. Maybe the reason why people want "Wikis" is because the docs can be edited from the web UI and pages have links between them? Not sure...
> As for the iframe aspect, if you know a way to displaying user's provided data without compromising on security, I am all hears :)
To display users data they should probably consider one of those "HTML purifier" things. Given that it's Python, there has got to be a module for this :-)
yes i realized the reason some would prefer a wiki over static docs is because they allows users to edit them without approval - i was just making the counter-point that this is precisely the reason some would not use a wiki and would prefer a static docs site (such as doxygen) - a wiki is a very different beast that is far too limited to be your only form of documentation but is often misused as a substitute for proper documentation - documentation should be written by a person who is very familiar and knowledgeable of the project - a wiki is not reliable in the same way - so the fact that pagure docs are not user-editable is not a missing feature - this is desirable behaviour for documentation
also remember that the pagure documentation feature is just another git repo so nothing impedes collaboration - project maintainers simply give push access to the docs repo to those who they trust to edit the docs
so my suggestion would be that if this feature would be implemented that it should not replace the pagure documentation feature but be an option aside it
yes i realized the reason some would prefer a wiki over static docs is because they allows users to edit them without approval - i was just making the counter-point that this is precisely the reason some would not use a wiki and would prefer a static docs site (such as doxygen) - a wiki is a very different beast that is far too limited to be your only form of documentation but is often misused as a substitute for proper documentation - documentation should be written by a person who is very familiar and knowledgeable of the project - a wiki is not reliable in the same way - so the fact that pagure docs are not user-editable is not a missing feature - this is desirable behaviour for documentation
also remember that the pagure documentation feature is just another git repo so nothing impedes collaboration - project maintainers simply give push access to the docs repo to those who they trust to edit the docs
so my suggestion would be that if this feature would be implemented that it should not replace the pagure documentation feature but be an option aside it
it maybe relevant that an upstream feature request exists that is somewhat mutually exclusive with this feature - in which the docs feature would be removed completely in favor of github-like gh-pages static hosting
the pagure docs essentially are a wiki except that there is no online editor - they must be edited locally and updated with git push - personally i do not see any problem with that but if ppl really want to allow random users to edit their docs without review then the simplest thing to do would be to add an online editor to the existing pagure docs - pagure has an analogous online editor for issues so probably all of the necessary pieces already exist in the codebase to convert the existing pagure docs feature into a wiki
in any case - for now it may be best to disable wikis in notabug now before anyone gets attached to them
it maybe relevant that an upstream feature request exists that is somewhat mutually exclusive with this feature - in which the docs feature would be removed completely in favor of github-like gh-pages static hosting
https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/469
the pagure docs essentially are a wiki except that there is no online editor - they must be edited locally and updated with git push - personally i do not see any problem with that but if ppl really want to allow random users to edit their docs without review then the simplest thing to do would be to add an online editor to the existing pagure docs - pagure has an analogous online editor for issues so probably all of the necessary pieces already exist in the codebase to convert the existing pagure docs feature into a wiki
in any case - for now it may be best to disable wikis in notabug now before anyone gets attached to them
there is a feature request for this upstream but it seems they are not very interested in this feature - mostly because pagure already has a documentation feature - the only significant difference is that wikis allow any random user to easily edit your documentation in place with no peer review - IMHO that is an anti-feature
however some users have asked for this, so for completeness i will note that the pagure docs support plaint text, HTML, markdown, and python RST format - so what is shown on the "docs" pages actually is a markdown renderer which already supports .md markdown - pagure issues have markdown editing/preview so perhaps most of the relevant parts are in place already
upstream issue --> https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/1221
This is a good point. Maybe the reason why people want "Wikis" is because the docs can be edited from the web UI and pages have links between them? Not sure...
To display users data they should probably consider one of those "HTML purifier" things. Given that it's Python, there has got to be a module for this :-)
yes i realized the reason some would prefer a wiki over static docs is because they allows users to edit them without approval - i was just making the counter-point that this is precisely the reason some would not use a wiki and would prefer a static docs site (such as doxygen) - a wiki is a very different beast that is far too limited to be your only form of documentation but is often misused as a substitute for proper documentation - documentation should be written by a person who is very familiar and knowledgeable of the project - a wiki is not reliable in the same way - so the fact that pagure docs are not user-editable is not a missing feature - this is desirable behaviour for documentation
also remember that the pagure documentation feature is just another git repo so nothing impedes collaboration - project maintainers simply give push access to the docs repo to those who they trust to edit the docs
so my suggestion would be that if this feature would be implemented that it should not replace the pagure documentation feature but be an option aside it
it maybe relevant that an upstream feature request exists that is somewhat mutually exclusive with this feature - in which the docs feature would be removed completely in favor of github-like gh-pages static hosting
https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/469
the pagure docs essentially are a wiki except that there is no online editor - they must be edited locally and updated with git push - personally i do not see any problem with that but if ppl really want to allow random users to edit their docs without review then the simplest thing to do would be to add an online editor to the existing pagure docs - pagure has an analogous online editor for issues so probably all of the necessary pieces already exist in the codebase to convert the existing pagure docs feature into a wiki
in any case - for now it may be best to disable wikis in notabug now before anyone gets attached to them