Minnow WIKI Status
Locked
12
12
 
|
All, The cryptography team is going to do some documentation on
wiki. Can anyone please tell me the status of Minnow? Are we going to move
the wiki to somewhere else? Will minnow content be moved; is it safe to use it
now? Thanks, Ron Teitelbaum Squeak Cryptography Team Leader |
|
|
Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
> > All, > > > > The cryptography team is going to do some documentation on wiki. Can > anyone please tell me the status of Minnow? Are we going to move the > wiki to somewhere else? Will minnow content be moved; is it safe to > use it now? > Anyone know the status? When will the minnow go down? Where are the contents to be moved to? Perhaps these questions should be added to the agenda of the next SqF board meeting. And, if they are, can they report back with the findings? brad |
|
|
Il giorno mar, 17/10/2006 alle 17.22 -0700, Brad Fuller ha scritto:
> Ron Teitelbaum wrote: > > > > All, > > > > > > > > The cryptography team is going to do some documentation on wiki. Can > > anyone please tell me the status of Minnow? Are we going to move the > > wiki to somewhere else? Will minnow content be moved; is it safe to > > use it now? > > > bump. > Anyone know the status? > When will the minnow go down? > Where are the contents to be moved to? > > Perhaps these questions should be added to the agenda of the next SqF > board meeting. > And, if they are, can they report back with the findings? The wiki status is one of the agenda items of tonight's board meeting: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006-October/109791.html Giovanni |
|
|
Am 18.10.2006 um 09:10 schrieb Giovanni Corriga:
> Il giorno mar, 17/10/2006 alle 17.22 -0700, Brad Fuller ha scritto: >> Ron Teitelbaum wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> >>> >>> >>> The cryptography team is going to do some documentation on wiki. >>> Can >>> anyone please tell me the status of Minnow? Are we going to move >>> the >>> wiki to somewhere else? Will minnow content be moved; is it safe to >>> use it now? >>> >> bump. >> Anyone know the status? >> When will the minnow go down? >> Where are the contents to be moved to? >> >> Perhaps these questions should be added to the agenda of the next SqF >> board meeting. >> And, if they are, can they report back with the findings? > > The wiki status is one of the agenda items of tonight's board meeting: > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006-October/ > 109791.html Right. But since the Board cannot order people to do something, it would need offers. TSTTCPW is to move the actual installation to our server. That would take someone to work with the box admin team to do it. Maybe we could even pursue the GA Tech folks to repoint their minnow DNS entry to us - there's an awful lot of links on the web to minnow. I can see several other ways to continue, but none without severe drawbacks. All would require significantly more work, so there would have to be volunteers to do it. - Bert - |
|
|
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> I can see several other ways to continue, but none without severe > drawbacks. All would require significantly more work, so there would > have to be volunteers to do it. For the last time I will bother you with pointing out that we have an import of the Swiki into the external persistency version of SmallWiki (2) (or Pier?) available. Although, as it has been gathering dust for a few months now I would actually need go and find it... Michael |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:04:12PM +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> >The wiki status is one of the agenda items of tonight's board meeting: > > > >http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006-October/ > >109791.html > > Right. But since the Board cannot order people to do something, it > would need offers. I'll offer. I will need the help of the web team. How much interest is there in changing the Wiki engine? I have encountered 3 obstacles in the Swiki setup (or at least, how it works an the Minnow Swiki: - no user-name based logging. It is very hard to translate the computer names stored in the change log into who did the editing - no easy rollback. It is possible, but not very convenient, to roll-back a page to a previous state. One must copy and paste the old text into the edit box. - willy-nilly page locking. Many wiki engines only allow a moderator to lock a page. In the Swiki, however, anyone can lock a page and prevent rollback until an administrator comes along. There are other, minor issues with the Swiki, but those are the big ones. A transition would most likely be a one or two phase process: 1. Get the wiki off of the Minnow servers at Georgia tech. (what about the other Swikis they host? Croquet?) 2. If there is interest, translate the wiki database to another format, most likely Magma + Pier. I am not too familiar with Comanche or Seaside, but I am sure they are easy enough to learn. > TSTTCPW is to move the actual installation to our server. That would > take someone to work with the box admin team to do it. Probably. Who are those people? > Maybe we could even pursue the GA Tech folks to repoint their minnow > DNS entry to us - there's an awful lot of links on the web to minnow. Mark: do you think this would be possible? > I can see several other ways to continue, but none without severe > drawbacks. All would require significantly more work, so there would > have to be volunteers to do it. Well, I am volunteering. What are your other ideas? Mark: please reply to [hidden email] if possible -- Matthew Fulmer |
|
|
On 10/22/06, Matthew Fulmer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > TSTTCPW is to move the actual installation to our server. That would > > take someone to work with the box admin team to do it. > > Probably. Who are those people? Before we get too much noise: this bit is actually in progress. Jochen Rick has access to box2 and is setting up new hardware at GATech. As soon as he starts migrating other bits to new GATech servers, he'll move the minnow wiki to box2. This'll be done before the end of this year as it looks now. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Tapple Gao
I would say go to Pier. I think Kieth released some software that you can
point at the swiki and it will slurp it all up. Am I right Kieth? >From: Matthew Fulmer <[hidden email]> >Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers >list<[hidden email]> >To: [hidden email], [hidden email] >Subject: Re: Minnow WIKI Migration >Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 20:54:20 -0700 > >On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:04:12PM +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote: > > >The wiki status is one of the agenda items of tonight's board meeting: > > > > > >http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006-October/ > > >109791.html > > > > Right. But since the Board cannot order people to do something, it > > would need offers. > >I'll offer. I will need the help of the web team. > >How much interest is there in changing the Wiki engine? I have >encountered 3 obstacles in the Swiki setup (or at least, how it >works an the Minnow Swiki: >- no user-name based logging. It is very hard to translate the > computer names stored in the change log into who did the > editing >- no easy rollback. It is possible, but not very convenient, to > roll-back a page to a previous state. One must copy and paste > the old text into the edit box. >- willy-nilly page locking. Many wiki engines only allow a > moderator to lock a page. In the Swiki, however, anyone can > lock a page and prevent rollback until an administrator comes > along. >There are other, minor issues with the Swiki, but those are the >big ones. > >A transition would most likely be a one or two phase process: >1. Get the wiki off of the Minnow servers at Georgia tech. > (what about the other Swikis they host? Croquet?) > >2. If there is interest, translate the wiki database to another > format, most likely Magma + Pier. > >I am not too familiar with Comanche or Seaside, but I am sure >they are easy enough to learn. > > > TSTTCPW is to move the actual installation to our server. That would > > take someone to work with the box admin team to do it. > >Probably. Who are those people? > > > Maybe we could even pursue the GA Tech folks to repoint their minnow > > DNS entry to us - there's an awful lot of links on the web to minnow. > >Mark: do you think this would be possible? > > > I can see several other ways to continue, but none without severe > > drawbacks. All would require significantly more work, so there would > > have to be volunteers to do it. > >Well, I am volunteering. What are your other ideas? > >Mark: please reply to [hidden email] if >possible > >-- >Matthew Fulmer > _________________________________________________________________ Use your PC to make calls at very low rates https://voiceoam.pcs.v2s.live.com/partnerredirect.aspx |
|
|
Has Pier solved the persistency issue? Holding all data in image is
*not* acceptable for real deployment. That is why Michael pointed out impara's Smallwiki version that puts everything into an external file tree. - Bert - Am 23.10.2006 um 05:59 schrieb J J: > I would say go to Pier. I think Kieth released some software that > you can point at the swiki and it will slurp it all up. Am I right > Kieth? > > >> From: Matthew Fulmer <[hidden email]> >> Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list<squeak- >> [hidden email]> >> To: [hidden email], [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Minnow WIKI Migration >> Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 20:54:20 -0700 >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:04:12PM +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote: >> > >The wiki status is one of the agenda items of tonight's board >> meeting: >> > > >> > >http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006- >> October/ >> > >109791.html >> > >> > Right. But since the Board cannot order people to do something, it >> > would need offers. >> >> I'll offer. I will need the help of the web team. >> >> How much interest is there in changing the Wiki engine? I have >> encountered 3 obstacles in the Swiki setup (or at least, how it >> works an the Minnow Swiki: >> - no user-name based logging. It is very hard to translate the >> computer names stored in the change log into who did the >> editing >> - no easy rollback. It is possible, but not very convenient, to >> roll-back a page to a previous state. One must copy and paste >> the old text into the edit box. >> - willy-nilly page locking. Many wiki engines only allow a >> moderator to lock a page. In the Swiki, however, anyone can >> lock a page and prevent rollback until an administrator comes >> along. >> There are other, minor issues with the Swiki, but those are the >> big ones. >> >> A transition would most likely be a one or two phase process: >> 1. Get the wiki off of the Minnow servers at Georgia tech. >> (what about the other Swikis they host? Croquet?) >> >> 2. If there is interest, translate the wiki database to another >> format, most likely Magma + Pier. >> >> I am not too familiar with Comanche or Seaside, but I am sure >> they are easy enough to learn. >> >> > TSTTCPW is to move the actual installation to our server. That >> would >> > take someone to work with the box admin team to do it. >> >> Probably. Who are those people? >> >> > Maybe we could even pursue the GA Tech folks to repoint their >> minnow >> > DNS entry to us - there's an awful lot of links on the web to >> minnow. >> >> Mark: do you think this would be possible? >> >> > I can see several other ways to continue, but none without severe >> > drawbacks. All would require significantly more work, so there >> would >> > have to be volunteers to do it. >> >> Well, I am volunteering. What are your other ideas? >> >> Mark: please reply to [hidden email] if >> possible >> >> -- >> Matthew Fulmer >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Use your PC to make calls at very low rates https:// > voiceoam.pcs.v2s.live.com/partnerredirect.aspx > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Cees De Groot
Il giorno dom, 22/10/2006 alle 13.16 +0200, Cees de Groot ha scritto:
> On 10/22/06, Matthew Fulmer <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > TSTTCPW is to move the actual installation to our server. That would > > > take someone to work with the box admin team to do it. > > > > Probably. Who are those people? > > Before we get too much noise: this bit is actually in progress. Jochen > Rick has access to box2 and is setting up new hardware at GATech. As > soon as he starts migrating other bits to new GATech servers, he'll > move the minnow wiki to box2. This'll be done before the end of this > year as it looks now. Having played with ComSwiki, Smallwiki and Pier, my suggestion is to wait for Jochen to port the Squeak Swiki to box2, and then start planning a migration to another wiki engine. Giovanni |
|
|
In reply to this post by J J-6
J J wrote:
> I would say go to Pier. I think Kieth released some software that you > can point at the swiki and it will slurp it all up. Am I right Kieth? IIRC this does not pull in the history. For the SmallWiki port Thomas back then wrote an importer that imports everything. The persistency also avoid having to keep everything in memory which with the amount of content on Minnow is not practical anyways. I know memory is cheap, but not that cheap ;-) Michael |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
2006/10/23, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>:
> Has Pier solved the persistency issue? Holding all data in image is > *not* acceptable for real deployment. That is why Michael pointed out > impara's Smallwiki version that puts everything into an external file > tree. How much data are we talking about? Both unparsed and parsed. Philippe > Am 23.10.2006 um 05:59 schrieb J J: > > > I would say go to Pier. I think Kieth released some software that > > you can point at the swiki and it will slurp it all up. Am I right > > Kieth? > > > > > >> From: Matthew Fulmer <[hidden email]> > >> Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list<squeak- > >> [hidden email]> > >> To: [hidden email], [hidden email] > >> Subject: Re: Minnow WIKI Migration > >> Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 20:54:20 -0700 > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:04:12PM +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote: > >> > >The wiki status is one of the agenda items of tonight's board > >> meeting: > >> > > > >> > >http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006- > >> October/ > >> > >109791.html > >> > > >> > Right. But since the Board cannot order people to do something, it > >> > would need offers. > >> > >> I'll offer. I will need the help of the web team. > >> > >> How much interest is there in changing the Wiki engine? I have > >> encountered 3 obstacles in the Swiki setup (or at least, how it > >> works an the Minnow Swiki: > >> - no user-name based logging. It is very hard to translate the > >> computer names stored in the change log into who did the > >> editing > >> - no easy rollback. It is possible, but not very convenient, to > >> roll-back a page to a previous state. One must copy and paste > >> the old text into the edit box. > >> - willy-nilly page locking. Many wiki engines only allow a > >> moderator to lock a page. In the Swiki, however, anyone can > >> lock a page and prevent rollback until an administrator comes > >> along. > >> There are other, minor issues with the Swiki, but those are the > >> big ones. > >> > >> A transition would most likely be a one or two phase process: > >> 1. Get the wiki off of the Minnow servers at Georgia tech. > >> (what about the other Swikis they host? Croquet?) > >> > >> 2. If there is interest, translate the wiki database to another > >> format, most likely Magma + Pier. > >> > >> I am not too familiar with Comanche or Seaside, but I am sure > >> they are easy enough to learn. > >> > >> > TSTTCPW is to move the actual installation to our server. That > >> would > >> > take someone to work with the box admin team to do it. > >> > >> Probably. Who are those people? > >> > >> > Maybe we could even pursue the GA Tech folks to repoint their > >> minnow > >> > DNS entry to us - there's an awful lot of links on the web to > >> minnow. > >> > >> Mark: do you think this would be possible? > >> > >> > I can see several other ways to continue, but none without severe > >> > drawbacks. All would require significantly more work, so there > >> would > >> > have to be volunteers to do it. > >> > >> Well, I am volunteering. What are your other ideas? > >> > >> Mark: please reply to [hidden email] if > >> possible > >> > >> -- > >> Matthew Fulmer > >> > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Use your PC to make calls at very low rates https:// > > voiceoam.pcs.v2s.live.com/partnerredirect.aspx > > > > > > > |
|
|
Philippe Marschall wrote:
> 2006/10/23, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>: >> Has Pier solved the persistency issue? Holding all data in image is >> *not* acceptable for real deployment. That is why Michael pointed out >> impara's Smallwiki version that puts everything into an external file >> tree. > > How much data are we talking about? Both unparsed and parsed. IIRC in the order of 2GB of Swiki files Michael |
|
|
2006/10/23, Michael Rueger <[hidden email]>:
> Philippe Marschall wrote: > > 2006/10/23, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>: > >> Has Pier solved the persistency issue? Holding all data in image is > >> *not* acceptable for real deployment. That is why Michael pointed out > >> impara's Smallwiki version that puts everything into an external file > >> tree. > > > > How much data are we talking about? Both unparsed and parsed. > > IIRC in the order of 2GB of Swiki files So about 300 Euros? Philippe |
|
|
Philippe Marschall wrote:
> 2006/10/23, Michael Rueger <[hidden email]>: >> Philippe Marschall wrote: >> > 2006/10/23, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>: >> >> Has Pier solved the persistency issue? Holding all data in image is >> >> *not* acceptable for real deployment. That is why Michael pointed out >> >> impara's Smallwiki version that puts everything into an external file >> >> tree. >> > >> > How much data are we talking about? Both unparsed and parsed. >> >> IIRC in the order of 2GB of Swiki files > > So about 300 Euros? and 2 hours to save the image after every change? Besides the fact that Squeak can't handle 2GB. Michael |
|
|
2006/10/23, Michael Rueger <[hidden email]>:
> Philippe Marschall wrote: > > 2006/10/23, Michael Rueger <[hidden email]>: > >> Philippe Marschall wrote: > >> > 2006/10/23, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>: > >> >> Has Pier solved the persistency issue? Holding all data in image is > >> >> *not* acceptable for real deployment. That is why Michael pointed out > >> >> impara's Smallwiki version that puts everything into an external file > >> >> tree. > >> > > >> > How much data are we talking about? Both unparsed and parsed. > >> > >> IIRC in the order of 2GB of Swiki files > > > > So about 300 Euros? > > and 2 hours to save the image after every change? If you have "save image" "persistence". But you could as well also only save the contents to the file system. > Besides the fact that Squeak can't handle 2GB. 64bit VM? Philippe |
|
|
On 10/23/06, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > So about 300 Euros? [...] > 64bit VM? > You pay the hosting bills for a new box? ;) |
|
|
2006/10/23, Cees de Groot <[hidden email]>:
> On 10/23/06, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > So about 300 Euros? > > [...] > > > 64bit VM? > > > You pay the hosting bills for a new box? ;) I'm willing to pay 2 GB of RAM if that's what is needed to run Pier. That Squeak can't handle this is a Squeak specific limitation that has nothing to do with the point that memory is that cheap. As pointed out numerous times on squeak-dev and disputed by none, all VM related issues can be fixed easily by just fixing the VM. This is no problem since the VM is open source. Philippe |
|
|
Philippe Marschall wrote:
> 2006/10/23, Cees de Groot <[hidden email]>: >> On 10/23/06, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > > > So about 300 Euros? >> >> [...] >> >> > 64bit VM? >> > >> You pay the hosting bills for a new box? ;) > > I'm willing to pay 2 GB of RAM if that's what is needed to run Pier. > That Squeak can't handle this is a Squeak specific limitation that has > nothing to do with the point that memory is that cheap. > As pointed out numerous times on squeak-dev and disputed by none, all > VM related issues can be fixed easily by just fixing the VM. This is > no problem since the VM is open source. So I'm assuming you just volunteered to fix these issues so we can switch to Pier in a few weeks? Michael |
Image as database (was: Re: Minnow WIKI Migration)
|
|
In reply to this post by Philippe Marschall
Am 23.10.2006 um 21:30 schrieb Philippe Marschall:
> 2006/10/23, Cees de Groot <[hidden email]>: >> On 10/23/06, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > > > So about 300 Euros? >> >> [...] >> >> > 64bit VM? >> > >> You pay the hosting bills for a new box? ;) > > I'm willing to pay 2 GB of RAM if that's what is needed to run Pier. > That Squeak can't handle this is a Squeak specific limitation that has > nothing to do with the point that memory is that cheap. > As pointed out numerous times on squeak-dev and disputed by none, all > VM related issues can be fixed easily by just fixing the VM. This is > no problem since the VM is open source. If we had a transactional virtual object memory that's continuously saved to disk (think OOZE/LOOM), that might be viable. Perhaps with Magma you could have almost the same semantics, just be careful what you touch. But not with the current object memory. No way. Not if you care about the data. It's not about RAM being cheap or not. It's about designing for the common and the worst case. Why you would want to bring in gigabytes of data if the working set is just a few megabytes is beyond me. - Bert - |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |