ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scot P. Floess" <>
Subject RE: ANT Wiki isn't wiki
Date Mon, 16 Apr 2012 01:22:38 GMT


I think you are being a wee bit critical here...  Personally, I'd prefer 
that not just anyone can edit the wiki pages - but those who have either 
proven themselves to the project or have submitted something that's been 
vetted by the project owners.  I've got a few projects and I certainly 
don't want just anyone to be able to modify whatever they "deem" 

Honestly, I'd argue the same for people wanting to contribute code - 
should everyone just be able to checkin their work?  Its open source - by 
virtue its community driven...

Seems reasonable to have checks and balances - even with 

I'm sure the good folks at this project will consider any 
suggestions/contributions you may desire...

I could be overly sensitive here - but your post came across harsh and 
unless I am wrong, I've not heard many people complaining about this 

Sorry - I'm pretty protective of this project...  I don't contribute any 
code, sometimes I jump in and answer questions...but I love Ant and this 
community and will voice my opinion when I feel its been judged harshly...

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, Stephen L. De Rudder wrote:

> By my definition of wiki it should allow all users to edit any page or to create a new
page. Oh, that also happens to be Ward Cunningham's definition, and he created the first wiki
and defined it that way. Oh, also agrees with my definition.  I realize
that your definition of wiki may be different, and I am not trying to get into a I am right
your wrong (there is plenty of room for different interpretations). In my opinion a wiki should
allow all users to edit and create pages and if it doesn't it shouldn't be called a wiki.
I also understand that it may be a wiki (by my definition) to a select group of people that
could be made available (as a non-wiki) for a larger group of people. To the larger group
of people it should be called something else.  Maybe if enough people research it and come
of with my interpretation of the definition of wiki then maybe consider renaming it (or not).
Regardless it would be nice to have a publicly editable site for contr
 ibutors like me to contribute to (besides this mailing list).  SLDR(Stephen L. De Rudder)>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 19:30:32 -0400
>> Subject: Re: ANT Wiki isn't wiki
>> From:
>> To:
>> A wiki doesn't have to be publicly editable to be a wiki. Wikipedia may
>> operate like that, but there are plenty of projects whose wikis are only
>> editable by registered users.
>> On Apr 15, 2012 6:32 PM, "Stephen L. De Rudder" <> wrote:
>>> The ant wiki isn't a wiki. It seems like most if not all the pages can not
>>> be modified by anonymous contributers. Please don't call it a wiki if
>>> people are not allowed to contribute. I wanted to add a page about the OS
>>> condition tag, but I couldn't. The manual only goes into detail about the
>>> <OS family="xxx"> stuff but ignores the name, arch, and version. It took
>>> a while but I found that those seem to be populated from the java
>>> properties, os.arch, and os.version. I think others could have
>>> benifited from my research if your wiki was a wiki. SLDR(Stephen L. De
>>> Rudder) I can't complain too much, the company I work for created a public
>>> wiki too. They do allow paying maintence and support customers to request
>>> access so they can contribute to the wiki (none to my knoledge have). After
>>> enough complaining (mostly be me) we are about to remove the wiki and
>>> rollout an expanded faq/blog site.

Scot P. Floess             RHCT  (Certificate Number 605010084735240)
Chief Architect FlossWare

View raw message