Feature #275

Wiki to Documents

Added by Pablo Lerina over 10 years ago. Updated over 10 years ago.

Status:ClosedStart date:
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:-% Done:

0%

Category:-
Target version:-
Resolution:

Description

At current projects we are working the documentation is built "on demand", and Track's Wiki proves to be an
excelent tool for that.

Also a project-level wiki and a "private" developer-level wiki..

What about implement a full-featured wiki system at redMine?

History

#1 Updated by Ross Manning over 10 years ago

I Agree about public & private, this would be great for customer
collaboration. The private area is for stuff you don't want the
customer to see!!

#2 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang over 10 years ago

Per project wiki has been to redMine.
Please read this post in the forums for more details:

http://rubyforge.org/forum/forum.php?thread_id=12456&forum_id
=7504

#3 Updated by Nick Read over 10 years ago

I agree that the existing Documents feature should simply be
replaced by the Wiki implementation. The next version of redMine
is certainly shaping up to be a fantastic piece of work.

#4 Updated by Pavol Murin over 10 years ago

Hi Jean-Philippe,
I already took a look - I still have a few problems, unfortunately,
I didn't get it to work yet. I described my problem in the help
forum - as I didn't notice your reply here.
I like the code so far and I try to understand it as well as
I can. I noticed that no column was created for the wiki table
- was this on purpose? I added a "start_page" column
in the 026 migration as text, as that seemed appropriate to me.
Please correct me, if I that is wrong.
I also had problems running the tests. Unfortunately, I'm quite
new to rails, so I didn't find the reasons. I will try to look
into it tomorrow.

Anyway, thanks a lot for your work! muro

#5 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang over 10 years ago

I've started coding wiki module.
As it will be possible to add attachments to wiki pages, i'm
thinking about removing the existing "Documents" module,
which will bring nothing more than the wiki will.
What do you think about it ?

Any suggestion is welcome.

#6 Updated by Pavol Murin over 10 years ago

Thanks for the information about acts_as_versioned. svn was just
an idea - you are the developer, so you are more than welcome
to choose what is appropriate. If there is anything I can help
with, let me know. I will take a look at acts_as_versioned.

The reason I suggested svn is that it also works with binary
data. On the other hand, maybe this data doesn't have to be versioned.
I also wanted to make it simple to import or export wiki data
easily - many projects already have their own wiki and proposing
a migration (to and from) path is very welcome.

#7 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang over 10 years ago

pmuro, you mean using svn as the backend for the wiki ?

I agree with you about the fact that version support is needed.
But it can be done easily with the db, for example with a plugin
such as acts_as_versioned. And I would feel more confortable
doing it this way.

#8 Updated by Pablo Lerina over 10 years ago

Yep! That's how I was thinking, adding version support and
generating an portable document presentation, to make easy
to export to PDF and alike..

#9 Updated by Pavol Murin over 10 years ago

I can also volunteer to help. I like the project, but miss at
least a history of documentation, so accidental deletions can
be reverted. Now this might be completely wrong and please correct
me if it is: what if the whole documentation would be held in
svn (in some readable format, e.g. markdown or redcloth) and
(re-)generated when needed? I have never implemented a wiki,
so this might be really off. This would also make the documentation
portable and open.

#10 Updated by Pablo Lerina over 10 years ago

I can help, at spare time...

#11 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang over 10 years ago

Thanks :)
I'll try to work on it.

#12 Updated by Nick Read over 10 years ago

I too vote for Wiki integration.

We are currently looking at moving to Trac for Issue tracking
+ Wiki integration. It has issues though:
- no customisable workflow
- single project
- no project management

Some of the above are in development, but that's where they have
stayed for some time now. After stumbling across RedMine though,
I'm completely blown away.

That said, Wiki integration is very important us. A project
level Wiki would be highly important, while a developer level
Wiki is much less important for us.

#13 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang over 10 years ago

It's true that a wiki is a great tool for documentation.
But for the moment, i don't plan to add this feature to redMine.
I prefer to focus on project management specific features like
time tracking, that should be added for the next release.

Best regards,
Jean-Philippe

Also available in: Atom PDF