Re: knowledge base stuff

From: <>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 13:55:43 +1300 (NZDT)

> On Thu, Mar 01, 2007, kinkie wrote:
>> Not that I know of; that would reqire a full-blown CMS engine.
>> I'll do some research, but I'm skeptic.
>> It's probably also overkill: the current policy (write-access requires
>> easily-given approval), together with the wiki's versioning capabilities
>> (to roll back unapproved changes) and page change monitoring, should be
>> adequate already.
>> We could promote contributions in the KB pages themselves (i.e. a
>> standard
>> footer or something like that); maybe that'd help attract help.
> Its not all that important to start with. Lets get the bugs and kinks
> worked
> out of the new website and get that thing live first. I'll then put
> feelers
> into the Squid community and see if we can find ourselves one or two
> interested
> people to start fleshing out the Wiki and website with various articles.

A non-squid problem here has led me down an Idea path that I think may
apply here to the KnowledgeBase concept you two are/were throwing around.

I occurs to me that any kind of KB needs real-life problems and solution,
must be user-driven, and have some form of unique problem identification.

It seems to me that we already have a form of this in the squid-users
mailing list. But that one is very cluttered with non-problem messages and
with failed solution attempts. So it needs a bit of cleaning.

What I am thinking of in a rough way is a KB which uses the squid-users
msg-IDs as the unique ID for a problem (after all the original problem has
been posted right?), and may in fact use the message itself from the
archive to describe the problem. Where a solution has been found,
references to the msg describin the solution could be used.
(By 'references' I mean either a web link by msg-ID or a PHP include to
show the archive content, descision to be made by the KB designer).

Msg can continue to be posted to squid-users as normal, but the KB
sumbission 'authorization' being to link the posts to the KB. Rather than
ading an extra submission on part of the users, which is not that likely
to get used anyway.

That would leverage an enourmous pile existing problem-solutions and
provide a framework for seamless and easy future additions. <dream>Might
even drop the clutter of repeated problem requests</dream>.

> Whats missing/broken @ besides the downloads?

I noticed the Advisories section showing a 404 last night.

Received on Wed Mar 07 2007 - 17:55:48 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 12:00:01 MDT