Hello Urho friends,
I would like to ask if there aren’t any plans on creating a wiki page. I think that a wiki page would be great so new users aren’t so lost in here and dont have to ask “stupid” questions. I already got a few tips I can share with others.
Hello Urho friends,
+1 for that.
I think a wiki would attract more newcomers, it’s a bit intimidating when you start with Urho. I’d be glad to contribute with examples and tutorials. I already have some material written waiting to be posted somewhere.
+1 for if we can add our own “User Contributions” section but have regular wiki sections for admin/moderator only
wiki +1: with many smallest examples and of course code tips and optimization tips
We had a wiki before on the urho3d repo. It wasn’t well maintained. It would be good to distance the wiki from what the urho team officially supports to allow for more varied, wierd, poorer quality, broken contributions, without burdening the urho main contributers. It is pretty nuts that the urho team is running near 40 examples in 3 languages, 5 (6 if you count the pi) platforms, and fixes bugs at god like speed.
I personally like githubs wiki / pull request model. It has no cost, statically generated, and free from databases and applications servers! I can open a urho3d-contrib organization and throw a wiki on there and give liberal access to anyone that wants it. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
That’s exactly the point, at least the way I see it: Allowing users who are willing to contribute with examples and tutorials to have a place to post in. The examples provided with Urho are great, but sometimes I miss examples on how to use the classes while reading the documentation, a wiki would help with that. Of course that would be a hell to maintain if it were to be done by the main Urho team!
Your pull request idea seems fine to me!
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
About what ? wiki based on git ? ok, i do not mind )
I think that we need examples of how this might work
Our old wiki (hosted on Urho3D repo) was being disabled mainly due to lack of content instead of lack of maintenance. Wiki, by nature, is supposed to be maintained by the project community and I think back then we had opened our wiki for everyone to edit. We promise to bring the wiki feature back again when there are requests to bring it back and it looks like we have built up enough momentum this time.
IMHO, we should not create another GitHub org or even repo for this purpose. It will just be a few button clicks to get the old wiki feature back on Urho3D repo. I want to drive all the web traffic as much as possible to the same web domain.
I am always glad to defer. If you want it on the github pages site i can help merging the wiki into the github pages site on the build process. Mating Jekyll and Gollum is always… interesting Subtrees / offline process are the basic options I think.
I seriously believe that the momentum of the Urho3D development team should always remain chiefly focused on developeent of Urho3D as to ensure that Urho3D development does not stall which I noted has happened many times to many game engines over the years ( including another engine I became an expert at many years ago ). The horrible problem with changing development focus away from engine developement and towards “documentation maintenance” is the leading cause of engine downfalls, IMHO.
[quote=“weitjong”]We promise to bring the wiki feature back again when there are requests to bring it back and it looks like we have built up enough momentum this time.
IMHO, we should not create another GitHub org or even repo for this purpose. It will just be a few button clicks to get the old wiki feature back on Urho3D repo. I want to drive all the web traffic as much as possible to the same web domain.[/quote]
I believe that the best thing that we can all do here is to keep in mind my previous statements in this post and try to help by way of:
1: Make sure that everybody who contributes examples to the wiki should put the date of their last update and the tested Urho3D version.
2: Every so often ( perhaps every other minor-release of Urho3D ) have some of the community verterans go through and re-test the examples in the wiki in order to maintain that the examples still work with newer Urho3D versions.
I am still very new to Urho3D and trying to get as up to speed as possible and with the other engine i mentioned earlier; me and many of our community had spent many many many hours doing what I am suggesting here. Our wiki was ( in general ) extremely up to date and us community vertrans would spend a great deal of our own personal time going on the forums to help keep both new comers and regular users supported.
^-- This allowed the engine developers to spend the bulk of their time on active engine development and only a couple days a week ( with the occasional full week usually after a release ) to come on the forums to help everyone.
Urho3D’s developers and community members have been extremely supportive in all areas and this is why I choose this engine over others out there, because I feel at home here and look forward to the day when I am good enough at Urho3D to help the community like so many of you have been helping me hey many thanks for that everyone!
p.s. sorry for the long post, I’m really loving Urho3D
Has there been any progress regarding a wiki?
I would love one too (and think Urho really needs one). I could write a setup&build guide since I just build Urho yesterday and wrote everything down what I did.
I don’t know these Git Wikis. We could also use http://www.wikia.com/Wikia (though I never worked with that).
The old wiki seems to be at code.google.com/p/urho3d/source … n219&r=219
The Ogre Wiki could be used to get ideas: ogre3d.org/tikiwiki/tiki-index.php?page=Home
I like the ideas from devrich:
[quote]1: Make sure that everybody who contributes examples to the wiki should put the date of their last update and the tested Urho3D version.
2: Every so often ( perhaps every other minor-release of Urho3D ) have some of the community veterans go through and re-test the examples in the wiki in order to maintain that the examples still work with newer Urho3D versions.[/quote]
Number 2 would be nice but someone needs to do that…
Though it’s also possible to add a line like “Last tested with Urho3D 1.32”, to get a last working version. Also if it didn’t work for whatever reason. This may be in irregular intervals/versions.
I am mainly in charge of the infra setup. I have commented before in this thread that it is only a simple flip to reenable the Wiki in our GitHub repo, with the approval from the project author of course. However, I have yet to seek his permission for this because I am (or was) experimenting with prose.io to create wiki pages directly in our main website (which is a GitHub Pages basically) using pull-request workflow. The idea is to concentrate all the readership traffic to our main website. Without promising anything, I believe it is achievable. Having said that, a few of the Urho core teams including myself are working on Emscripten port right now. So, it will probably take a while before our wiki is back again. But, please don’t wait for it. You and other would be wiki writers can start writing about Urho3D now.
Having a Wiki more connected to the main site would be great.
What does this pull-request workflow mean for that? Are there some administrators/moderators who need to approve every change before it gets visible?
What about including images and maybe other material? Or embedding videos from like youtube or something?
The old wiki seems to have had only text.
The pull-request workflow for the wiki will be similar to how now the dev contributors submit their code changes. The changes can / will be reviewed / commented by anyone, but only the core team members who has the push privilege will be able to merge the changes into master branch. Those that contribute frequently sooner or later would be offered to have the push privilege so he/she can push directly without submitting a pull-request first. If everything goes as plan then yes, there will be a way to upload rich media content to the server. But don’t hold me to that.
While the pull-request-based approach seems better to me in order to maintain a wiki I think it would be beneficial to start off with an unofficial wiki anyone can edit (or maybe just requesting for write-access here in the forum).
I think that’s a good alternative mainly because as weitjong just mentioned, the main devs are busy working on the core engine right now and the wiki would start slowly. That or they would need to spend time reviewing changes instead of working on the engine, anyway both things are a problem.
So I’m talking about staring off with a user-based wiki and then when there’s something tangible switching to the pull-request model. This can make the wiki’s start a bit smoother. I’m basically suggesting quantity over quality for a start, so we can get a lot of content in there.
And by unofficial I don’t mean it can’t be hosted on the Urho site itself, but as long as the Wiki is user-based and not “officially” reviewed it should be labeled as such.
What do you think?
I’m not sure if it would be really necessary to check every change before it gets public. Many wikis allow edits by any (registered) user and changes can be undone easily. A more open model could lead to more people contributing.
Though it should be possible to restrict this (generally), if there are too many trolls.
Yeah. Though having tutorials and other material is important, too. If there are enough contributors they should do most of the work and not the core developers. Though the developers or experienced users may need to look for errors in generated documents (regarding Urho3D details/usage).
…I accidentally the whole…
As already mentioned above: I knew about this Wikia thing but never used that. So yesterday I took a look to see what it can do. The “create a wiki”-assistant had four step and I wanted to see what can be adjusted/set. At step three I got like three emails with “Welcome! Your new Wiki has been created!” …
So now we have a Wiki!
I already inserted many links to interesting forum posts, sites that may be useful for game developers and already started two tutorials. The one about Blender is mostly finished and I’m currently working on the Urho Build one to finish it ASAP.
I mostly added content and didn’t really configure it.
This Wikia system has some minor quirks (like image positioning being a bit primitive) but it seems ok for a start.
Can one of the core developers create an account so I can make him an administrator?
Edit: Finished the Urho3D Build Tutorial and started another one. That build tutorial took super long, i had to do every step like a dozen times until I had every screenshot correct and everything was working smoothly… Didn’t expect that much work. (Though not every tutorial is such a step by step guide for the absolute beginner.)
Thanks for taking the initiative ! I agree the best thing is for users to start contributing freely, when we can see the interest in the wiki then we can all get more excited for it.
I see there is an export option if we decide to move in another direction later.
The pull-request model is definitely valuable from a quality-ensured perspective (with added bonus of simply being cleaner/github style without ads etc), but it can also be useful to have less official resources available for quick content generation.
There are ads? I don’t see any, got an adblocker :mrgreen: (Adblock Plus for Firefox).
The wiki should be already editable by registered users. You could already contribute ideas or other material.
A gallery of nice screenshots would also be nice.
Awesome! I will make contributions over time!
Unfortunately, the username “GoogleBot” was taken so I had to use “GoogleBot42” could an admin change my name on these forums to GoogleBot42? Thanks!
[quote=“GoogleBot”]Awesome! I will make contributions over time!
Unfortunately, the username “GoogleBot” was taken so I had to use “GoogleBot42” could an admin change my name on these forums to GoogleBot42? Thanks![/quote]
- curious * Why GoogleBot for your username ?