I am creating a site under mediawiki. Is there a feature or an extension to know for a version which users have contributed to this version and in what proportion? For example, for the article on new-york in wikipedia, know the list of contributors of this version and in what proportion did they participate?
prop=contributors. See the contributors API doc page for details.
Your question mainly seems to be about Wikipedia, which has a tool for this:
https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo
For your specific example, the link is:
https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/fr.wikipedia.org/New%20York
The tool, XTools, is open source and may be useful for other MediaWiki installations as well:
https://github.com/x-tools/xtools
Related
The license of Schema.org is Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (version 3.0).
Does this mean that any search engine can use Schema.org to implement structure data?
See the FAQ Under what terms can we re-use this documentation (and schemas, examples, software)?
As noted in our terms of service document, schema.org schemas are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (version 3.0). These terms also apply to the supporting documentation on this site and on our blog, as well as to the markup examples used in this site. The software used for our site is also available for opensource re-use under an Apache 2 license. If you have feedback on these terms please get in touch.
Depending on your meaning of "use schema.org", it might be that your search engine doesn’t have to follow the license.
For example, if you parse HTML documents, find Schema.org markup, and interpret it according to the Schema.org definitions, you don’t have to license/attribute anything.
However, if you include definitions/examples (taken from schema.org) on your search engine’s documentation site, you have to license it under CC BY-SA 3.0 and attribute accordingly.
Yes, it means you can use its content, and modify without delete the maker name (or whatever), and share it.
But you can't use it for commercial purpose.
Schema.org is released with the Apache License Version 2.0, you can have a look at it in the development repo: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/blob/sdo-deimos/LICENSE
You can also check What are the real life implications for an Apache 2 license?
I am busy upgrading SMW 1.9.2 to version 2.2. How do I know which version to use of the accompanying extensions like Semantic Forms or Semantic Extra Special Properties?
As you can see at the SMW docs:
Various MediaWiki extensions are available for further extending
Semantic MediaWiki with additional functionality, and some basic
extensions of MediaWiki are generally useful for employing SMW.
Most extensions are not maintained by the SMW Project. Please see the
extension's main page and installation files to find out whom to
contact for support and where to report bugs. Questions related to
these extensions can be discussed on the mailing list or forum for the
extension (where specified), or on the Semantic MediaWiki user mailing
list.
So, in case that you don't find the relation between your SMW version and the version of each extension in the Semantic MediaWiki user mailing list or the forum for the extension, you should look at the official docs for every extension or contact the developers of each extension, as there is not official reference about the relation you're looking for.
I have an application, and now it's the time to write the user help document. I need at least 3 features:
An offline UserHelp.chm;
An online version index.html;
Clicking "help" on any winform can guide the user to a specified help page.
So what kind of tools (HTML workshop?) are perfect for my project, and how to do? I appreciate if you can give me some general guidelines.
For requirement #1 and #2, I recommend you to use SandCastle. It can generate chm file as well as ASP.NET pages. Most importantly, this project is still active and maintained by Microsoft.
For requirement #3, you can google "context sensitive help winform". You should be able to find a lot of references. Here is one of them from code project
If it must not be free of charge, I heard good things about Help & Manual: http://www.ec-software.com/
Helpware is another wellknown vendor: http://www.helpware.net/
Check out Helpinator, it's good too, but less expensive and has free edition.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
We have a pretty cool little web framework that we have used successfully on dozens of client projects. We are planning to release this software to the community. However, I am wringing my hands about what should/should-not go on a new open source software project page. What are the things the site must have? Docs? A Wiki? A link to download? What else?
And, a related but possibly different question is how do we begin marking release numbers. All we use internally is the SVN stamp. Is there a good way to determine when to start calling something version 0.9 versus 1.0 and 1.1 and so-on?
You can get an idea of what's required by what open source project hosting sites provide:
A web site which acts as the "one stop shop" for the project
Docs, potentially in wiki form
A source repository allowing browsing, anonymous checkout, and authenticated and authorised commits
Issue tracking and new feature requests
As for version numbers... I don't think anyone's worked out the best way of doing that yet :) With a bare minimum of thought, I'd consider:
v1.0 should be ready for production use
Major version number changes can completely lose backward compatibility (if necessary - hardly a goal though!)
Minor version number changes should usually be mostly compatible - deprecating is probably better than removing/renaming bits of API
Smaller-than-minor version number changes should only include minor functional additions (if any) and bug/performance fixes
On versioning, I think the absolute best place to start from is Semantic Versioning.
The 0.9 / 1.0 / 1.1 / 1.0.1 / ... version labelling is for marketing purpose only (in the good sense of it). This allows your users/customers to identify if the release is major, minor or bug-fix and whether you consider it mature or not yet.
The minimum to deliver is sources. Other deliverables depend on how you are willing to help your users and provide them support.
Choose a website to host the source on first (SourceForge, for example). Get the source up there on a version control system with anonymous checkout. Get an email address on there for people to contact you.
Call this first version 0.1. This is because you don't have docs yet to support the project.
Then breathe.
Then start looking at documentation, like a wiki. Once you have it all covered, at a basic level of detail, and you believe the release is ready for some primetime, then move to 1.0, and start providing binary downloads.
Make sure you think about the license for the sources.
When I look at an open source project, one of the first things I check is the license. If the license is not GPL2/GPL3/BSD styles or similar, that's a demotivator for me.
The license means what people will do with it, how it can grow, and how much it is owned by the corporate who released it. As by choosing open source I try not to depend on corporations (who depend on their share holders), I really choose to use the software that is really free.
As the open source community is very sensitive to corporate power (Google seems a bit immune to that at the moment), so you really must make sure to deliver the message of truly free on your web site and other materials you release about the software.
See more on free software and open source definitions of the FSF.
Take a look at GitHub or Google Code. they provide a very good starting point for own open source projects. You can describe your project, documentate in a wiki, use git or svn as your repository, and provide downloads together with an issue tracking and multi-developer management. Nice environments out of the box to learn from and to use them.
For release numbers: I don't recommend 0.9 or something like this for pre-releases. The reason? What about release 1.9? Is it the 9th sub-release of the major release 1 or is it the last pre-release of release 2? My release standard is decribed here: http://code.google.com/p/tideland-eas/wiki/ReleaseStandard. I'm using a three-number-scheme, major, minor, and fix, together with a status code, alpha, beta, gamma, and the release date. So I'm able to handle multiple releases in parallel easily.
Hope this helps.
mue
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm looking for a free/open source collaborative project manager that can be deployed internally in my workplace that would act similar to Codeplex or Sourceforge. Does anyone know of something like this, and if so do you have experience with it.
Requirements:
Open Source or Free
Locally Deployable
Has the same types of features found in Sourceforge / Codeplex
Issue/Feature Tracking
Community Interaction (ie. Voting, Roles, etc.)
SCM Integration (Optional)
.NET/Windows Friendly (Optional)
Every business ends up having internal utilities, and domain specific apps that developers create to make life easier. Given the input of the internal developer community they have the potential to become much better (can you say GMail...), and I would simply like to foster such an environment internally by providing an easy place for that interaction to take place.
UPDATE:
So I like what I am seeing in both Trac and GForge, but both are heavily geared towards UNIX/Subversion environments. I should have specified this, but we are a MS shop from top to bottom. How practical do you think it is going to be to try and use these in a MS .NET environment? Would that be like trying to shove a square peg through a round hole?
I like redmine for this: http://www.redmine.org. The only thing it's missing from your criteria is voting, but there might even be a plugin for this.
Trac is also popular (http://trac.edgewall.org) but it lacks suport for aggregation of data across projects.
Try GForge, it's a SourceForge fork and has most of its features.
I agree, Trac should work. IMHO setting up Subversion should be relatively easy on Windows too, there are great Windows clients for it (tortoiseSvn), and Trac runs on python, so it will work on Windows too.
Other advantages of Sourceforge Enterprise are these plugins. There are extra plugins for Visual Studio wich can be found here and here.
SourceForge Enterprise Edition 4.4 is available for free for up to 15 users. We use it for our development team and another development team where I work.
It's been working great for us. It has subversion and cvs built in (whichever you wish to use). If you plan on accessing it over the internet you might want to enable HTTPS. I had to do a little finagling to get HTTPS to work correctly (finding the right CentOS packages to install). If you wanted to use this solution with HTTPS I wouldn't mind if you sent me a message asking for help.
It comes with a VM for VMWare Player:
http://www.collab.net/downloads/sfee/index4.4.html
Launchpad has support for Code Hosting and version control, Bug tracking, Blueprints, Answers, Polls, Translations, etc.
Launchpad is used by the Ubuntu Project.
A few weeks ago, Launchapad was released as open source.
I was just wondering the same thing, something like Trac but in .NET, after a quick GOOGLE search (I have never tried these tools) I found
sharpforge (This no longer looks free!)
I like how the site .netTiers looks.
They use screwturn wiki.
It is totally free if you fulfill all GPLv2 statements.
Assembla and BeanStalk are nice, both have things like; wiki, discussion, alerts, chat, ticketing, Trac, Git and Subversion
What about Trac? It's pretty simple, but does it's Job for a lot of Open Source projects.
I would concur on the Trac suggestion. I use it both for an open source project and for an internal project. It has decent issue tracking and integration with Subversion which allows links between tickets and subversion checkins. It also has an integrated wiki, which can be of some use for documentation. Although we do not use it for voting / community type features, I know there's a number of addons to it that might serve this purpose.