|
Size: 2598
Comment:
|
Size: 4936
Comment: converted to 1.6 markup
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 3: | Line 3: |
| * [[Date()]] - Split up the too large frontpage into multiple head pages. * [[Date(2002-12-13T03:32:56)]] |
* <<Date(2004-07-25T02:19:08Z)>> - updated to 1.2.3, made custom layout into a theme * <<Date(2003-04-29T20:24:59Z)>> - updated to rev 1.173 * <<Date(2003-03-30T15:56:33Z)>> - updated to CVS and refreshed the help pages * <<Date(2003-03-13T00:13:44Z)>> - activated ''edit locks'' (warnings only for now); time handling changed to use UTC, '''so you have to adapt your user (timezone) settings''' * <<Date(2003-03-07T17:35:38)>> - update from cvs should have fixed RecentChanges problems for anon users; installing PyXML should have fixed any RSS problems * <<Date(2003-02-13T00:46:26)>> - update to rev 1.168, which especially means backups on editor submits for people having a homepage, and spam protection via the `MailTo` macro * <<Date(2003-02-07T20:44:54)>> - update to CVS head * <<Date(2002-12-29T15:29:08)>> - Split up the too large frontpage into multiple head pages. * <<Date(2002-12-13T03:32:56)>> |
| Line 7: | Line 14: |
| * linksThatStartWithLowerCase are not links anymore, thus boost.python/InternalDataStructures stopped to work; but ["boost.python/InternalDataStructures"] works, and on the ["boost.python"] page, `/InternalDataStructures` works too (i.e. use the short form of subpage links). * [[Date(2002-11-21T06:16:54)]] - updated to CVS current (rev 1.163) * [[Date(2002-11-06T22:40:50)]] - You can now refer to PEPs like so: '''`PEP:0123`''' -> PEP:0123 * [[Date(2002-08-02T00:19:27)]] - Outgoing mail works now |
* linksThatStartWithLowerCase are not links anymore, thus boost.python/InternalDataStructures stopped to work; but [[boost.python/InternalDataStructures]] works, and on the [[boost.python]] page, `/InternalDataStructures` works too (i.e. use the short form of subpage links). * <<Date(2002-11-21T06:16:54)>> - updated to CVS current (rev 1.163) * <<Date(2002-11-06T22:40:50)>> - You can now refer to PEPs like so: '''`PEP:0123`''' -> PEP:0123 * <<Date(2002-08-02T00:19:27)>> - Outgoing mail works now |
| Line 14: | Line 21: |
| * Decide explicitly a convention for page deletion for unpriviliged users. | |
| Line 21: | Line 27: |
| Well, this is hardly surprising in an English wiki. You can use full http links, though. -- JürgenHermann [[DateTime(2002-07-26T02:01:40)]] | Well, this is hardly surprising in an English wiki. You can use full http links, though. -- JürgenHermann <<DateTime(2002-07-26T02:01:40)>> |
| Line 23: | Line 29: |
| ''I wasn't surprised, but I was thinking of adding ISBN.de http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/ to intermap.txt (now that I found how ISBN works).'' -- DanielDittmar [[DateTime(2002-07-26T21:14:18)]] | ''I wasn't surprised, but I was thinking of adding ISBN.de http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/ to intermap.txt (now that I found how ISBN works).'' -- DanielDittmar <<DateTime(2002-07-26T21:14:18)>> |
| Line 27: | Line 33: |
| What I would like to use this Wiki for is for comparisons between Python packages. Most areas seem to have multiple solutions. Is it very unwiki to impose some structure like I did in WebProgramming and trying to keep it up? GuiProgramming and IntegratingPythonWithOtherLanguages are also candidates for this kind of style. -- DanielDittmar [[DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)]] | What I would like to use this Wiki for is for comparisons between Python packages. Most areas seem to have multiple solutions. Is it very unwiki to impose some structure like I did in WebProgramming and trying to keep it up? GuiProgramming and IntegratingPythonWithOtherLanguages are also candidates for this kind of style. -- DanielDittmar <<DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)>> |
| Line 31: | Line 37: |
| Discussions about Python should be held on comp.lang.python and the SIGs, but it is OK to summary those discussions in the wiki. -- DanielDittmar [[DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)]] | Discussions about Python should be held on comp.lang.python and the SIGs, but it is OK to summarize those discussions in the wiki. -- DanielDittmar <<DateTime(2002-07-15T02:21:48)>> |
| Line 35: | Line 41: |
| That still means that you can capture from news, or from the wiki itself. Both ways are valid, but always refactoring/summarizing is A Good Thing. -- JürgenHermann [[DateTime(2002-07-17T21:24:51)]] | That still means that you can capture from news, or from the wiki itself. Both ways are valid, but always refactoring/summarizing is A Good Thing. -- JürgenHermann <<DateTime(2002-07-17T21:24:51)>> |
| Line 37: | Line 43: |
| What kind of conversation are we talking about? | |
| Line 38: | Line 45: |
| * Philosophy - I don't care where it goes (usenet, here, C2, elsewhere) * "How does this piece work?" - it works great here "How does this work" has been great. If you need me to back this up for you, I can back it up with many anecdotes; Most of the pages I write here have seen some related action. People tell me that they read and use (and correct) my pages, and it'd be sad to see that come to an end. The only thing that annoys me are pages with questions for names. Instead, the page name should be the name of the piece, and then the question should appear on the page. That is, [[How can "normal" users report bugs in Python or the documentation?]] should be a page called PythonDocumentation, and then the question attached to ''that'' page. -- LionKimbro <<DateTime(2005-09-15T22:31:31Z)>> [[[lwickjr]]: Sorry about that, Lion. :I ] ---- I think this Wiki would best serve as continuing from where standard Python documentation left off: showing examples of use, adding information about good packages not existing in the standard distribution, and talking about higher-level stuff like 'tips for parallel processing'. Examples are very important for newcomers, and hey, many people like to learn new things first from examples, and dive into reference when details become important (including me). As for discussing Python in general, I think c.l.p is invaluable and needs no replacement - so I guess I'm along the same lines as DanielDittmar and JürgenHermann. -- EdvardMajakari <<DateTime(2005-09-15T15:14:13Z)>> |
News / Changes
2004-07-25 - updated to 1.2.3, made custom layout into a theme
2003-04-29 - updated to rev 1.173
2003-03-30 - updated to CVS and refreshed the help pages
2003-03-13 - activated edit locks (warnings only for now); time handling changed to use UTC, so you have to adapt your user (timezone) settings
2003-03-07 - update from cvs should have fixed RecentChanges problems for anon users; installing PyXML should have fixed any RSS problems
2003-02-13 - update to rev 1.168, which especially means backups on editor submits for people having a homepage, and spam protection via the MailTo macro
2003-02-07 - update to CVS head
2002-12-29 - Split up the too large frontpage into multiple head pages.
2002-12-13
- updated to CVS current (rev 1.166)
- Friday the 13th lived up to the promise... several bugs fixed
linksThatStartWithLowerCase are not links anymore, thus boost.python/InternalDataStructures stopped to work; but boost.python/InternalDataStructures works, and on the boost.python page, /InternalDataStructures works too (i.e. use the short form of subpage links).
2002-11-21 - updated to CVS current (rev 1.163)
2002-11-06 - You can now refer to PEPs like so: PEP:0123 -> 0123
2002-08-02 - Outgoing mail works now
Things that need doing, unless they're done
- We need a mission statement on the front page. What it's for, who can/should participate.
- Need to create a discussion / ask for help section(s).
Discussion
Unfortunately, the ISBN links point to amazon.com, not amazon.de -- DanielDittmar
Well, this is hardly surprising in an English wiki. You can use full http links, though. -- JürgenHermann 2002-07-26 02:01:40
I wasn't surprised, but I was thinking of adding ISBN.de http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/ to intermap.txt (now that I found how ISBN works). -- DanielDittmar 2002-07-26 21:14:18
Some ideas about the aims of this wiki:
What I would like to use this Wiki for is for comparisons between Python packages. Most areas seem to have multiple solutions. Is it very unwiki to impose some structure like I did in WebProgramming and trying to keep it up? GuiProgramming and IntegratingPythonWithOtherLanguages are also candidates for this kind of style. -- DanielDittmar 2002-07-15 02:21:48
Imposing (widely accepted) structure is not unwiki, actually it is a goal of refactoring. Otherwise, you end up with a spaghetti wiki, i.e. chaos. -- jh
Discussions about Python should be held on comp.lang.python and the SIGs, but it is OK to summarize those discussions in the wiki. -- DanielDittmar 2002-07-15 02:21:48
The entire point of a wiki is to capture discussion in such a way that it will be remembered IMO - dhl 20020716
That still means that you can capture from news, or from the wiki itself. Both ways are valid, but always refactoring/summarizing is A Good Thing. -- JürgenHermann 2002-07-17 21:24:51
What kind of conversation are we talking about?
- Philosophy - I don't care where it goes (usenet, here, C2, elsewhere)
- "How does this piece work?" - it works great here
"How does this work" has been great. If you need me to back this up for you, I can back it up with many anecdotes; Most of the pages I write here have seen some related action. People tell me that they read and use (and correct) my pages, and it'd be sad to see that come to an end.
The only thing that annoys me are pages with questions for names. Instead, the page name should be the name of the piece, and then the question should appear on the page. That is, How can "normal" users report bugs in Python or the documentation? should be a page called PythonDocumentation, and then the question attached to that page.
-- LionKimbro 2005-09-15 22:31:31 [lwickjr: Sorry about that, Lion. :I ]
I think this Wiki would best serve as continuing from where standard Python documentation left off: showing examples of use, adding information about good packages not existing in the standard distribution, and talking about higher-level stuff like 'tips for parallel processing'. Examples are very important for newcomers, and hey, many people like to learn new things first from examples, and dive into reference when details become important (including me). As for discussing Python in general, I think c.l.p is invaluable and needs no replacement - so I guess I'm along the same lines as DanielDittmar and JürgenHermann. -- EdvardMajakari 2005-09-15 15:14:13