Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

vmassol
Administrator
Hi,

As you know I like clean stuff (some could call it an obsession ;)).  
While browsing the Design/Idea spaces on dev.xwiki.org I noticed  
several pages containing stuff already implemented.

I'd like to propose the following strategy:

* Once a design has been implemented, document it (for example in the  
Modules space on code.xwiki.org)
* When both the new design has been implemented and documented, delete  
the wiki page in the Design space.

WDYT?

For example I'd like to remove this page:
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/XWikiSyntaxMapping

I'd also like to document the xwiki-component module in Modules and  
then remove this page:
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/ArchitectureV2

Thanks
-Vincent

_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

Thomas Mortagne
Administrator
+1

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 20:20, Vincent Massol<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> As you know I like clean stuff (some could call it an obsession ;)).
> While browsing the Design/Idea spaces on dev.xwiki.org I noticed
> several pages containing stuff already implemented.
>
> I'd like to propose the following strategy:
>
> * Once a design has been implemented, document it (for example in the
> Modules space on code.xwiki.org)
> * When both the new design has been implemented and documented, delete
> the wiki page in the Design space.
>
> WDYT?
>
> For example I'd like to remove this page:
> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/XWikiSyntaxMapping
>
> I'd also like to document the xwiki-component module in Modules and
> then remove this page:
> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/ArchitectureV2
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>



--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

Sergiu Dumitriu-2
In reply to this post by vmassol
Vincent Massol wrote:

> Hi,
>
> As you know I like clean stuff (some could call it an obsession ;)).  
> While browsing the Design/Idea spaces on dev.xwiki.org I noticed  
> several pages containing stuff already implemented.
>
> I'd like to propose the following strategy:
>
> * Once a design has been implemented, document it (for example in the  
> Modules space on code.xwiki.org)
> * When both the new design has been implemented and documented, delete  
> the wiki page in the Design space.

Shouldn't we keep those for historical reasons, somewhere outside the
Design space? How about DesignArchive? We could move a page there, and
add at the end or at the top a conclusion, like "Implemented, see [the
documentation page]", or "Deprecated, see [alternative design]".

> For example I'd like to remove this page:
> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/XWikiSyntaxMapping
>
> I'd also like to document the xwiki-component module in Modules and  
> then remove this page:
> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/ArchitectureV2

This one should be kept IMO, since it contains more than just the
description of the component architecture.

--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

Marius Dumitru Florea
Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:

> Vincent Massol wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As you know I like clean stuff (some could call it an obsession ;)).  
>> While browsing the Design/Idea spaces on dev.xwiki.org I noticed  
>> several pages containing stuff already implemented.
>>
>> I'd like to propose the following strategy:
>>
>> * Once a design has been implemented, document it (for example in the  
>> Modules space on code.xwiki.org)
>> * When both the new design has been implemented and documented, delete  
>> the wiki page in the Design space.
>
> Shouldn't we keep those for historical reasons, somewhere outside the
> Design space? How about DesignArchive? We could move a page there, and
> add at the end or at the top a conclusion, like "Implemented, see [the
> documentation page]", or "Deprecated, see [alternative design]".

+1

Thanks,
Marius

>
>> For example I'd like to remove this page:
>> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/XWikiSyntaxMapping
>>
>> I'd also like to document the xwiki-component module in Modules and  
>> then remove this page:
>> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/ArchitectureV2
>
> This one should be kept IMO, since it contains more than just the
> description of the component architecture.
>
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

rrodrigueznt
In reply to this post by Sergiu Dumitriu-2
Hi all,

Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:

> Vincent Massol wrote:
>  
>> Hi,
>>
>> As you know I like clean stuff (some could call it an obsession ;)).  
>> While browsing the Design/Idea spaces on dev.xwiki.org I noticed  
>> several pages containing stuff already implemented.
>>
>> I'd like to propose the following strategy:
>>
>> * Once a design has been implemented, document it (for example in the  
>> Modules space on code.xwiki.org)
>> * When both the new design has been implemented and documented, delete  
>> the wiki page in the Design space.
>>    
>
> Shouldn't we keep those for historical reasons, somewhere outside the
> Design space? How about DesignArchive? We could move a page there, and
> add at the end or at the top a conclusion, like "Implemented, see [the
> documentation page]", or "Deprecated, see [alternative design]".
>  
I've been supporting here a position where historical archive of any
change in a given document is one of the main reasons to consider a wiki
as the core of an information system. I would also like to see an
alternative that doesn't imply to delete the seed document even though
it is superseded by a new document.

Cheers,

Ricardo

--
Ricardo Rodríguez
Your EPEC Network ICT Team

_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

vmassol
Administrator

On Aug 17, 2009, at 2:35 PM, [Ricardo Rodriguez] Your EPEC Network ICT  
Team wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
>> Vincent Massol wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As you know I like clean stuff (some could call it an obsession ;)).
>>> While browsing the Design/Idea spaces on dev.xwiki.org I noticed
>>> several pages containing stuff already implemented.
>>>
>>> I'd like to propose the following strategy:
>>>
>>> * Once a design has been implemented, document it (for example in  
>>> the
>>> Modules space on code.xwiki.org)
>>> * When both the new design has been implemented and documented,  
>>> delete
>>> the wiki page in the Design space.
>>>
>>
>> Shouldn't we keep those for historical reasons, somewhere outside the
>> Design space? How about DesignArchive? We could move a page there,  
>> and
>> add at the end or at the top a conclusion, like "Implemented, see  
>> [the
>> documentation page]", or "Deprecated, see [alternative design]".
>>
> I've been supporting here a position where historical archive of any
> change in a given document is one of the main reasons to consider a  
> wiki
> as the core of an information system. I would also like to see an
> alternative that doesn't imply to delete the seed document even though
> it is superseded by a new document.

This is about cleaning up.

No system can go on indefinitely by keeping everything online. The  
strategy is simple:
- you backup (as we do every day) and remove things that shouldn't be  
kept. They're still available on backup should they be needed one day.

As for revisions we'll need a way in the future to be able to maintain  
that too since they grow quite large.

I don't agree about absolutely keeping old things online when they're  
not needed anymore. If we had done this we would still live with some  
mess of xwiki.org as it was back in 2005-2006.

The main point of a wiki is to *NOT* keep stale things by applying  
constant refactorings (which is what I suggest) so I definitely don't  
agree about using a wiki as an archival system (there are way better  
solutions for that) :)

Thanks
-Vincent

> Cheers,
>
> Ricardo
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

vmassol
Administrator
In reply to this post by Sergiu Dumitriu-2

On Aug 17, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:

> Vincent Massol wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As you know I like clean stuff (some could call it an obsession ;)).
>> While browsing the Design/Idea spaces on dev.xwiki.org I noticed
>> several pages containing stuff already implemented.
>>
>> I'd like to propose the following strategy:
>>
>> * Once a design has been implemented, document it (for example in the
>> Modules space on code.xwiki.org)
>> * When both the new design has been implemented and documented,  
>> delete
>> the wiki page in the Design space.
>
> Shouldn't we keep those for historical reasons, somewhere outside the
> Design space? How about DesignArchive? We could move a page there, and
> add at the end or at the top a conclusion, like "Implemented, see [the
> documentation page]", or "Deprecated, see [alternative design]".

I understand your point, which is to not loose the "discussion" that  
produced the designs, including comments from people, etc.

BTW we already have a "Completed" state in Design. However you don't  
see it when you browse the design space using XEclipse or WebDAV so at  
the very minimum moving them out in a DesignArchive space would help.

Ok I'll move them there for now even though the likelihood that we'll  
need them is probably low.

>> For example I'd like to remove this page:
>> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/XWikiSyntaxMapping
>>
>> I'd also like to document the xwiki-component module in Modules and
>> then remove this page:
>> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/ArchitectureV2
>
> This one should be kept IMO, since it contains more than just the
> description of the component architecture.

Then this additional stuff needs to be documented properly somewhere  
IMO.

Thanks for the feedback
-Vincent

_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

rrodrigueznt
In reply to this post by vmassol
Hi,


Vincent Massol wrote:
>
> This is about cleaning up.
>
>  

I am almost sure now: I've just jumped into the wrong thread :-( Sorry
if I am adding nothing but noise.

> No system can go on indefinitely by keeping everything online. The  
> strategy is simple:
> - you backup (as we do every day) and remove things that shouldn't be  
> kept. They're still available on backup should they be needed one day.
>  

I do agree. But I've a huge problem there: how to decide which "things"
should not be kept. Yes, they will be on backups, but how to be sure
that "the system" will be able to find them when needed?
> As for revisions we'll need a way in the future to be able to maintain  
> that too since they grow quite large.
>  
As devs say when you agree, +1 :-)
> I don't agree about absolutely keeping old things online when they're  
> not needed anymore. If we had done this we would still live with some  
> mess of xwiki.org as it was back in 2005-2006.
>  

Again, the same problem. How to decide that a "thing" is not needed? I'm
afraid I must make an effort to present an example. A case study. I am
thinking/working in a research environment. It is really hard to decide
what could be deprecated at a given moment.
> The main point of a wiki is to *NOT* keep stale things by applying  
> constant refactorings (which is what I suggest) so I definitely don't  
> agree about using a wiki as an archival system (there are way better  
> solutions for that) :)
>  

I agree! I don't think about a wiki (XWiki) as archival system. I think
that I think (sic) about XWiki like a key piece in an information system
helping to move textual information (prose explanation about data and
thoughts) into structured documents, then into knowledge.

Perhaps documents can/must not last forever, but years should be
considered as a regular duration for a document life cycle. During this
time, it is possible that the size of modification won't be an issue: a
single document won't growth forever, but the number of relations will do.

I've to read a much more about this!

> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>  

Thank you very much for your thoughts!

Ricardo

--
Ricardo Rodríguez
Your EPEC Network ICT Team

_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

vmassol
Administrator

On Aug 18, 2009, at 1:01 AM, [Ricardo Rodriguez] Your EPEC Network ICT  
Team wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> Vincent Massol wrote:
>>
>> This is about cleaning up.
>>
>>
>
> I am almost sure now: I've just jumped into the wrong thread :-( Sorry
> if I am adding nothing but noise.
>
>> No system can go on indefinitely by keeping everything online. The
>> strategy is simple:
>> - you backup (as we do every day) and remove things that shouldn't be
>> kept. They're still available on backup should they be needed one  
>> day.
>>
>
> I do agree. But I've a huge problem there: how to decide which  
> "things"
> should not be kept. Yes, they will be on backups, but how to be sure
> that "the system" will be able to find them when needed?

This is the usual question and the answer is usually that you need to  
keep a reader able to read them along with the data. Even more you  
need to maintain the reader over time to ensure it continues running  
on the hardware.

Then how long the data is kept online completely depends on the domain  
and use case. In your case you could keep it 10 years online or more.  
Provided you have enough disk space and your DB is correctly indexed,  
that should work fine.

For a documentation site it's a bit more problematic since the site  
needs to be relatively clean and when users go to it they should not  
feel it's a mess or a work in progress too much since otherwise this  
feeling will reflect on their feeling for the software. In the case at  
hand it's acceptable since it's on the dev wiki and not the main  
documentation wikis.

>> As for revisions we'll need a way in the future to be able to  
>> maintain
>> that too since they grow quite large.
>>
> As devs say when you agree, +1 :-)
>> I don't agree about absolutely keeping old things online when they're
>> not needed anymore. If we had done this we would still live with some
>> mess of xwiki.org as it was back in 2005-2006.
>>
>
> Again, the same problem. How to decide that a "thing" is not needed?  
> I'm
> afraid I must make an effort to present an example. A case study. I am
> thinking/working in a research environment. It is really hard to  
> decide
> what could be deprecated at a given moment.
>> The main point of a wiki is to *NOT* keep stale things by applying
>> constant refactorings (which is what I suggest) so I definitely don't
>> agree about using a wiki as an archival system (there are way better
>> solutions for that) :)
>>
>
> I agree! I don't think about a wiki (XWiki) as archival system. I  
> think
> that I think (sic) about XWiki like a key piece in an information  
> system
> helping to move textual information (prose explanation about data and
> thoughts) into structured documents, then into knowledge.
>
> Perhaps documents can/must not last forever, but years should be
> considered as a regular duration for a document life cycle. During  
> this
> time, it is possible that the size of modification won't be an  
> issue: a
> single document won't growth forever, but the number of relations  
> will do.
>
> I've to read a much more about this!

Well I think we both agree:
1) wikis are tools that make it easy to keep stuff up to date and  
apply refactorings to content
2) in general it's bad form to loose content

For 2) I was focusing on the content representing the solution in the  
design docs which I was proposing to drop from the design doc since I  
was proposing to move it elsewhere (in the main doc location). However  
I was indeed also suggesting to loose content (which was the comments  
in the design docs or some intermediary steps that allowed us to reach  
the final solution). However Sergiu didn't agree and I could  
understand why. So I backtracked and I've moved done design docs in a  
DesignArchive space. At some points it'll get removed but it'll  
probably be in a few years now.

Thanks
-Vincent

> Thank you very much for your thoughts!
>
> Ricardo
>
> --
> Ricardo Rodríguez
> Your EPEC Network ICT Team
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

rrodrigueznt
Hi,

Vincent Massol wrote:

>
>
> This is the usual question and the answer is usually that you need to  
> keep a reader able to read them along with the data. Even more you  
> need to maintain the reader over time to ensure it continues running  
> on the hardware.
>
> Then how long the data is kept online completely depends on the domain  
> and use case. In your case you could keep it 10 years online or more.  
> Provided you have enough disk space and your DB is correctly indexed,  
> that should work fine.
>  

I know this is a kind of "thread kidnapping", but here we have one our
main concerns right now: Lucene search seems to have some issue that
prevents it to work fine.

For instance. I get 70 hits (logged search) when looking for "Servlet"...

http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/LuceneSearch?text=Servlet&x=0&y=0

Only a variable number of entries are shown in each page, but never the
total number.

I think this is a major issue concerning how to retrieve stored
contents. I don't know if it could be my Internet clients that are doing
something wrong, but I keep getting this consistently.

> For a documentation site it's a bit more problematic since the site  
> needs to be relatively clean and when users go to it they should not  
> feel it's a mess or a work in progress too much since otherwise this  
> feeling will reflect on their feeling for the software. In the case at  
> hand it's acceptable since it's on the dev wiki and not the main  
> documentation wikis.

I can only agree with this. It seems to me that I am being a bit naive
thinking about a unique repository of prose/data/information from which
applying rules and policies will shown the right facet for each "type"
of users.

I agree about the fact that clear documentations eases the access of new
users to any new system/software.

>
> Well I think we both agree:
> 1) wikis are tools that make it easy to keep stuff up to date and  
> apply refactorings to content
> 2) in general it's bad form to loose content
>
> For 2) I was focusing on the content representing the solution in the  
> design docs which I was proposing to drop from the design doc since I  
> was proposing to move it elsewhere (in the main doc location). However  
> I was indeed also suggesting to loose content (which was the comments  
> in the design docs or some intermediary steps that allowed us to reach  
> the final solution). However Sergiu didn't agree and I could  
> understand why. So I backtracked and I've moved done design docs in a  
> DesignArchive space. At some points it'll get removed but it'll  
> probably be in a few years now.

I do hope in a few years time we have the solution for to-be-deprecated
contents!

Thanks for your time,

Ricardo

--
Ricardo Rodríguez
Your EPEC Network ICT Team

_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

Pascal Voitot
hi

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:06 AM, [Ricardo Rodriguez] Your EPEC Network ICT
Team <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Vincent Massol wrote:
> >
> >
> > This is the usual question and the answer is usually that you need to
> > keep a reader able to read them along with the data. Even more you
> > need to maintain the reader over time to ensure it continues running
> > on the hardware.
> >
> > Then how long the data is kept online completely depends on the domain
> > and use case. In your case you could keep it 10 years online or more.
> > Provided you have enough disk space and your DB is correctly indexed,
> > that should work fine.
> >
>
> I know this is a kind of "thread kidnapping", but here we have one our
> main concerns right now: Lucene search seems to have some issue that
> prevents it to work fine.
>
> For instance. I get 70 hits (logged search) when looking for "Servlet"...
>
> http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/LuceneSearch?text=Servlet&x=0&y=0
>
> Only a variable number of entries are shown in each page, but never the
> total number.
>
> I think this is a major issue concerning how to retrieve stored
> contents. I don't know if it could be my Internet clients that are doing
> something wrong, but I keep getting this consistently.
>

What do you mean because when I always get the same number of hits with 30
hits per presentation page and 3 pages... From my point of view of XWiki.org
user, sometimes, there are some strange results or no result but I think
this is due to the fact that the site content has been changed or the server
redeployed and lucene has not indexed everything yet or there has been a
problem while indexing. I've already asked several times about it and each
time, when people look at my problem, it's OK again because lucene
periodically indexes as far as I remember :)
But you may speak about something else...


>
> > For a documentation site it's a bit more problematic since the site
> > needs to be relatively clean and when users go to it they should not
> > feel it's a mess or a work in progress too much since otherwise this
> > feeling will reflect on their feeling for the software. In the case at
> > hand it's acceptable since it's on the dev wiki and not the main
> > documentation wikis.
>
> I can only agree with this. It seems to me that I am being a bit naive
> thinking about a unique repository of prose/data/information from which
> applying rules and policies will shown the right facet for each "type"
> of users.
>
> I agree about the fact that clear documentations eases the access of new
> users to any new system/software.
>
> >
> > Well I think we both agree:
> > 1) wikis are tools that make it easy to keep stuff up to date and
> > apply refactorings to content
> > 2) in general it's bad form to loose content
> >
> > For 2) I was focusing on the content representing the solution in the
> > design docs which I was proposing to drop from the design doc since I
> > was proposing to move it elsewhere (in the main doc location). However
> > I was indeed also suggesting to loose content (which was the comments
> > in the design docs or some intermediary steps that allowed us to reach
> > the final solution). However Sergiu didn't agree and I could
> > understand why. So I backtracked and I've moved done design docs in a
> > DesignArchive space. At some points it'll get removed but it'll
> > probably be in a few years now.
>
> I do hope in a few years time we have the solution for to-be-deprecated
> contents!
>

What do you do today with your 10s of HardDrives with Mo, Go of deprecated
data you don't even remember even if they could be interesting... The loss
of digital information meaning also the loss of knowledge and maybe the loss
of a part of our history will be one of the challenge in the future (this
phrase is too serious so I put a smiley at the end :))... but there is also
the case when some info keep going on internet and you would like it to be
erased but it's almost impossible :):):)


>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> Ricardo
>
> --
> Ricardo Rodríguez
> Your EPEC Network ICT Team
>
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

rrodrigueznt
Hi!

>> Hi,
>>
>> Vincent Massol wrote:
>>    
>>>      
>
> What do you mean because when I always get the same number of hits with 30
> hits per presentation page and 3 pages... From my point of view of XWiki.org
> user, sometimes, there are some strange results or no result but I think
> this is due to the fact that the site content has been changed or the server
> redeployed and lucene has not indexed everything yet or there has been a
> problem while indexing. I've already asked several times about it and each
> time, when people look at my problem, it's OK again because lucene
> periodically indexes as far as I remember :)
> But you may speak about something else...
>  

Sergiu has been recently dealing with this issue. Please, see this...

http://n2.nabble.com/Lucene-again-td3273364.html#a3273364

I'm getting now similar results with another searches. For instance, if
I do a logged search looking for "Servlet", I get this...

http://xen.net/images/searchingServlet.jpg

Only four entries out of 30 in the first page of results. The second one
shows only 3 and the third one, eight out of ten.

I am using Firefox 3.5.2 in a Mac OS X 10.5.8 box, and also get the same
results using updated releases of Safari and OmniWeb. Cache is clean.

>  
>
> What do you do today with your 10s of HardDrives with Mo, Go of deprecated
> data you don't even remember even if they could be interesting... The loss
> of digital information meaning also the loss of knowledge and maybe the loss
> of a part of our history will be one of the challenge in the future (this
> phrase is too serious so I put a smiley at the end :))... but there is also
> the case when some info keep going on internet and you would like it to be
> erased but it's almost impossible :):):)
>  

Gonna change the sentence in our home page right now!!! :-) Even though
I do prefer to stick with this another one from you also with a smiley
at the end...

Everything is possible... your imagination is the limit :)

http://n2.nabble.com/Programming-Help-td509957.html#a17229158

After all, not all is lost in the net. Let's XWiki cope with the challenge!

I will be relatively far from computers for five days. But of course I
will do as much as I can to follow all the interesting topics that are
being discussed in the lists. Thanks for your time.

Cheers,

Ricardo

--
Ricardo Rodríguez
Your EPEC Network ICT Team

_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

Pascal Voitot
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 9:18 AM, [Ricardo Rodriguez] Your EPEC Network ICT
Team <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Vincent Massol wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >
> > What do you mean because when I always get the same number of hits with
> 30
> > hits per presentation page and 3 pages... From my point of view of
> XWiki.org
> > user, sometimes, there are some strange results or no result but I think
> > this is due to the fact that the site content has been changed or the
> server
> > redeployed and lucene has not indexed everything yet or there has been a
> > problem while indexing. I've already asked several times about it and
> each
> > time, when people look at my problem, it's OK again because lucene
> > periodically indexes as far as I remember :)
> > But you may speak about something else...
> >
>
> Sergiu has been recently dealing with this issue. Please, see this...
>
> http://n2.nabble.com/Lucene-again-td3273364.html#a3273364
>
> I'm getting now similar results with another searches. For instance, if
> I do a logged search looking for "Servlet", I get this...
>
> http://xen.net/images/searchingServlet.jpg
>
> Only four entries out of 30 in the first page of results. The second one
> shows only 3 and the third one, eight out of ten.
>
> I am using Firefox 3.5.2 in a Mac OS X 10.5.8 box, and also get the same
> results using updated releases of Safari and OmniWeb. Cache is clean.
> >
> >
> > What do you do today with your 10s of HardDrives with Mo, Go of
> deprecated
> > data you don't even remember even if they could be interesting... The
> loss
> > of digital information meaning also the loss of knowledge and maybe the
> loss
> > of a part of our history will be one of the challenge in the future (this
> > phrase is too serious so I put a smiley at the end :))... but there is
> also
> > the case when some info keep going on internet and you would like it to
> be
> > erased but it's almost impossible :):):)
> >
>
> Gonna change the sentence in our home page right now!!! :-) Even though
> I do prefer to stick with this another one from you also with a smiley
> at the end...
>
> Everything is possible... your imagination is the limit :)


Ricardo, I want to keep the copyright of my sentence and let Vincent with
his sentence and I really disagree with him because my imagination has no
limit :)



> http://n2.nabble.com/Programming-Help-td509957.html#a17229158
>
> After all, not all is lost in the net. Let's XWiki cope with the challenge!
>
> I will be relatively far from computers for five days. But of course I
> will do as much as I can to follow all the interesting topics that are
> being discussed in the lists. Thanks for your time.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ricardo
>
> --
> Ricardo Rodríguez
> Your EPEC Network ICT Team
>
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Our strategy for Design docs already implemented

rrodrigueznt
Oops!

Pascal Voitot wrote
Ricardo, I want to keep the copyright of my sentence and let Vincent with
his sentence and I really disagree with him because my imagination has no
limit :)
Sorry Pascal! I've read the message as written by Vincent! Please, could you accept my apologies?

Of course it is not the best place in the universe, but your quotation has now joint the one from Vincent in the home page of our site... http://environmentalchangen.net.

I have to spent some time improving this homepage... :)

BTW, please, could you confirm the behaviour of Lucene search I am seeing here? I am not using a Sony Vaio running Windows Vista which has never been used to access xwiki.org before. Same problem with logged search. Thanks!

Greetings,

Ricardo