Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Vim Tips Wiki - Remove author?

Expand Messages
  • John Beckett
    Each tip on the wiki has a header. We ve pruned some of the information that was originally imported from vim.org, and now we re wondering whether to also
    Message 1 of 14 , Feb 21, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Each tip on the wiki has a header. We've pruned some of the information
      that was originally imported from vim.org, and now we're wondering
      whether to also remove the author field.

      The wiki way of dealing with authorship is to use "History", which
      records the edit summary, user name, and changes performed by each user.
      Wikipedia has thousands of magnificent pages where there is no visible
      author.

      On the Vim Tips wiki there are lots of cases where the original tip was
      pretty weak, and it's only the subsequent editing on the wiki that has
      provided polish. Sometimes we manually remove the author when we notice
      that removal appears appropriate, but it's a fairly arbitrary and
      time-consuming process.

      To summarise discussions (most recent being [1]):

      * It is unfair to credit some authors when the original tip was
      simplistic or defective, and it's been fixed by wiki editors (sometimes
      by merging in the imported comments). We should either credit every
      significant contributor or none.

      * We could replace "author" with "original author" to clarify its
      meaning. The idea is that a contributor shouldn't be discouraged from
      editing because some author "owns" the tip, or wonder whether to add
      their own name as an author if substantial edits are performed. Of
      course, if a tip does have an active author (someone who cares about
      it), they are welcome to clean up or remove any inappropriate edits, but
      no one owns a tip (if they do, it should be removed from the wiki).

      * I have done a temporary manual edit of one tip[2] to show what
      "original author" looks like.

      * Adding words to the header doesn't help the tip. We should clarify
      that "version" in the header means "minimum version of Vim required to
      use the tip, we think". It might be useful to say "minimum version", but
      "original author" doesn't help.

      * We could remove the author field after ensuring that the author's name
      is shown in the edit history (by having a script edit each tip to put
      "original author NAME" in the summary).

      I am posting to the vim-l (Vim Tips Wiki) and vim_use (Google Groups)
      mailing lists to seek opinions on the future of the author field. You
      might like to comment on other fields in the header as well.

      The current position favoured by the discussion[1] is that the name of
      each author should be copied to an edit summary in the history, and then
      the author field should be removed.

      [1] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:JohnBeckett
      [2] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Moving_to_matching_braces

      John


      --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
      You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
      -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
    • Tom Link
      ... IMHO collaborative tools like a wiki and authorship are incompatible concepts. In a wiki that is actively used it rarely makes sense to attribute a page to
      Message 2 of 14 , Feb 21, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        > Each tip on the wiki has a header. We've pruned some of the information
        > that was originally imported from vim.org, and now we're wondering
        > whether to also remove the author field.

        IMHO collaborative tools like a wiki and authorship are incompatible
        concepts. In a wiki that is actively used it rarely makes sense to
        attribute a page to a single author.

        I also wonder why it is important to know who wrote which tip -- other
        than maybe identifying "interesting" patterns in the editing history.
        Listing the authors in the editing history should be sufficient and it
        does more justice to everyone because it's easy to find out who
        contributed what.

        So I'd vote for removing the author field.

        Tom.

        --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
        You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
        For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
        -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
      • Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
        Saluton John :) ... Totally agree here. ... I m going to suggest a bit more of brutality here. I think that Vim is all about community. Pride is OK, and so
        Message 3 of 14 , Feb 22, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Saluton John :)

          On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 11:24:12 +1100, John Beckett dixit:
          > To summarise discussions (most recent being [1]):
          >
          > * It is unfair to credit some authors when the original tip was
          > simplistic or defective, and it's been fixed by wiki editors
          > (sometimes by merging in the imported comments). We should either
          > credit every significant contributor or none.

          Totally agree here.

          > * We could remove the author field after ensuring that the author's
          > name is shown in the edit history (by having a script edit each tip
          > to put "original author NAME" in the summary).

          I'm going to suggest a bit more of "brutality" here. I think that Vim is
          all about community. Pride is OK, and so is being credited, but it
          shouldn't be the power behind contributing to the tips wiki, IMHO.

          So, having author names in the edit summary in the history of each wiki
          entry is very cool. People get credit for what they do, so it is near
          perfect, but taking the work of adding the original author names to the
          summary... well, I don't think it is worth the effort.

          This said, and because I usually know how people work inside, if the
          original author cannot add his name to the edit summary himself (which
          to me is a very good solution) then it should be added automatically
          using a script if at all possible. Otherwise someone (not me, certainly)
          could get mad ;)

          But the point I'm trying to make here is that if adding such information
          is a lot of work *for you*, then you should be credited for ALL the
          tips, exactly for that reason: you're doing a lot of work on them. It's
          good to know who contributed what because you may need to contact the
          author of a certain part of a tip (or even the original poster), but
          crediting should be done from now on by the author of the modifications
          themselves. If recovering the original authorship and adding it to the
          edit history is a pain...

          Raúl "DervishD" Núñez de Arenas Coronado
          --
          Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
          It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... RAmen!

          --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
          You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
          For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
          -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
        • Marc Weber
          ... I totally agree here. IMHO the only goal should creating one of the best resources to lookup tips, scripts and knowledge. Marc Weber
          Message 4 of 14 , Feb 22, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 11:14:59PM -0800, Tom Link wrote:
            >
            > > Each tip on the wiki has a header. We've pruned some of the information
            > > that was originally imported from vim.org, and now we're wondering
            > > whether to also remove the author field.
            >
            > IMHO collaborative tools like a wiki and authorship are incompatible
            > concepts. In a wiki that is actively used it rarely makes sense to
            > attribute a page to a single author.
            >
            > I also wonder why it is important to know who wrote which tip -- other
            > than maybe identifying "interesting" patterns in the editing history.
            > Listing the authors in the editing history should be sufficient and it
            > does more justice to everyone because it's easy to find out who
            > contributed what.
            >
            > So I'd vote for removing the author field.

            I totally agree here.
            IMHO the only goal should creating one of the best resources to lookup
            tips, scripts and knowledge.

            Marc Weber

            --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
            You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
            For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
            -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
          • Charles E. Campbell, Jr.
            ... There are some additional considerations/points I d like to point out: * The tip authors made their tips with the understanding that they d have prominent
            Message 5 of 14 , Feb 22, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              John Beckett wrote:
              > Each tip on the wiki has a header. We've pruned some of the information
              > that was originally imported from vim.org, and now we're wondering
              > whether to also remove the author field.
              >
              > The wiki way of dealing with authorship is to use "History", which
              > records the edit summary, user name, and changes performed by each user.
              > Wikipedia has thousands of magnificent pages where there is no visible
              > author.
              >
              > On the Vim Tips wiki there are lots of cases where the original tip was
              > pretty weak, and it's only the subsequent editing on the wiki that has
              > provided polish. Sometimes we manually remove the author when we notice
              > that removal appears appropriate, but it's a fairly arbitrary and
              > time-consuming process.
              >
              > To summarise discussions (most recent being [1]):
              >
              > * It is unfair to credit some authors when the original tip was
              > simplistic or defective, and it's been fixed by wiki editors (sometimes
              > by merging in the imported comments). We should either credit every
              > significant contributor or none.
              >
              > * We could replace "author" with "original author" to clarify its
              > meaning. The idea is that a contributor shouldn't be discouraged from
              > editing because some author "owns" the tip, or wonder whether to add
              > their own name as an author if substantial edits are performed. Of
              > course, if a tip does have an active author (someone who cares about
              > it), they are welcome to clean up or remove any inappropriate edits, but
              > no one owns a tip (if they do, it should be removed from the wiki).
              >
              > * I have done a temporary manual edit of one tip[2] to show what
              > "original author" looks like.
              >
              > * Adding words to the header doesn't help the tip. We should clarify
              > that "version" in the header means "minimum version of Vim required to
              > use the tip, we think". It might be useful to say "minimum version", but
              > "original author" doesn't help.
              >
              > * We could remove the author field after ensuring that the author's name
              > is shown in the edit history (by having a script edit each tip to put
              > "original author NAME" in the summary).
              >
              > I am posting to the vim-l (Vim Tips Wiki) and vim_use (Google Groups)
              > mailing lists to seek opinions on the future of the author field. You
              > might like to comment on other fields in the header as well.
              >
              > The current position favoured by the discussion[1] is that the name of
              > each author should be copied to an edit summary in the history, and then
              > the author field should be removed.
              >
              > [1] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:JohnBeckett
              > [2] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Moving_to_matching_braces
              >
              There are some additional considerations/points I'd like to point out:

              * The tip authors made their tips with the understanding that they'd
              have prominent credit. Probably many don't care, indeed, by this point
              some have likely "moved on" to (brace yourselves) management and don't
              use vim much anymore. Removing that credit, however,is a violation of
              that understanding.

              * Authorship can convey a notion of reliability (or lack thereof). An
              article by Tony M would, for example, probably be considered more
              trustworthy (authoritative :)) than one from (*-* NOTICE: THE NETPOLICE
              HAVE CENSORED SOME INFORMATION AT THIS POINT *-*).

              * Other than curiosity, I suspect that most consumers of the
              tips/articles don't care who wrote them; of those few that do,
              undoubtedly fewer know how to look up the editing history (and yet fewer
              have done so). Thus I expect most replies on this thread will be fine
              with removing authorship notices for the tips -- they didn't write them.

              * The "right" group with which to discuss this would be, IMHO, with the
              authors themselves. However, it seems to me that that may be
              impractical, unless the email addresses of the authors are stored
              somewhere on vim.sf.net, perhaps by the plugin login database.

              * The tips were placed on a public forum (vim.sf.net). By this
              reasoning, the tips are "public domain" and thus authorship may be
              removed at will (aside: I am not a lawyer, laws vary from place to
              place, and so I make no representation about the correctness of this
              advice ...). This point acts as a counter to the first consideration I
              made.

              So, ideally, one would obtain permission from the original authors if
              their work remains largely unchanged. However, this seems to me to be
              an impractical thing, especially since it may be rather difficult to
              locate them (email-wise). Anyway, you have my permission to remove
              authorship from my tips (that'll save you at least one email!) :)

              Regards,
              Chip Campbell




              --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
              You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
              For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
              -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
            • Tom Link
              ... When the vimtips were still hosted on vim.sf.net, they were also made available as plain text file[1] without any mention of the author. So there was no
              Message 6 of 14 , Feb 22, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                > * The tip authors made their tips with the understanding that they'd
                > have prominent credit.

                When the vimtips were still hosted on vim.sf.net, they were also made
                available as plain text file[1] without any mention of the author. So
                there was no real agreement at any time that the tip authors are to be
                mentioned.

                > Thus I expect most replies on this thread will be fine
                > with removing authorship notices for the tips -- they didn't write them.

                When the tips were transferred to wikia one of those tips I didn't
                submit anonymously was misattributed to somebody else and there is a
                chance the same thing happened for a couple of other tips. I don't
                think I could agree but I also don't really care that much.


                [1] BTW I found that really useful because that way the tips could be
                integrated with the vim help. I have no idea if you (J Beckett) have
                database access or if it is possible to export those tips in some
                useful format that could be easily converted to a tagged vim help
                file, maybe using the descriptive titles as tags, but I think it would
                be really useful being able to browse them from within vim. This was
                something I personally missed when they moved to wikia. Can the whole
                set of tips be exported somehow?

                --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
              • John Beckett
                ... Thanks, these are good points. People have suggested removing the entire header and/or removing the authors a couple of times in the past, and I have
                Message 7 of 14 , Feb 22, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Charles E. Campbell, Jr. wrote:
                  > There are some additional considerations/points I'd like to
                  > point out:
                  >
                  > * The tip authors made their tips with the understanding that
                  > they'd have prominent credit. Probably many don't care,
                  > indeed, by this point some have likely "moved on" to (brace
                  > yourselves) management and don't use vim much anymore.
                  > Removing that credit, however,is a violation of that understanding.
                  >
                  > * Authorship can convey a notion of reliability (or lack
                  > thereof). An article by Tony M would, for example, probably
                  > be considered more trustworthy (authoritative :)) than one
                  > from (*-* NOTICE: THE NETPOLICE HAVE CENSORED SOME
                  > INFORMATION AT THIS POINT *-*).
                  >
                  > * Other than curiosity, I suspect that most consumers of the
                  > tips/articles don't care who wrote them; of those few that
                  > do, undoubtedly fewer know how to look up the editing history
                  > (and yet fewer have done so). Thus I expect most replies on
                  > this thread will be fine with removing authorship notices for
                  > the tips -- they didn't write them.
                  >
                  > * The "right" group with which to discuss this would be,
                  > IMHO, with the authors themselves. However, it seems to me
                  > that that may be impractical, unless the email addresses of
                  > the authors are stored somewhere on vim.sf.net, perhaps by
                  > the plugin login database.
                  >
                  > * The tips were placed on a public forum (vim.sf.net). By
                  > this reasoning, the tips are "public domain" and thus
                  > authorship may be removed at will (aside: I am not a lawyer,
                  > laws vary from place to place, and so I make no
                  > representation about the correctness of this advice ...).
                  > This point acts as a counter to the first consideration I made.
                  >
                  > So, ideally, one would obtain permission from the original
                  > authors if their work remains largely unchanged. However,
                  > this seems to me to be an impractical thing, especially since
                  > it may be rather difficult to locate them (email-wise).
                  > Anyway, you have my permission to remove authorship from my
                  > tips (that'll save you at least one email!) :)

                  Thanks, these are good points. People have suggested removing the entire
                  header and/or removing the authors a couple of times in the past, and I
                  have deferred thinking about it due to some uncomfortable feelings along
                  the lines of what you've mentioned.

                  I'll ponder whether something might be done (a page listing all tips and
                  original authors?). I'm afraid that you're right about emailing the
                  authors. That information has gone. I suppose a vim.org database might
                  have a record of registered users and emails, but I doubt if anyone is
                  going to feel like digging out that list and broadcasting a message.

                  John


                  --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                  You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                  For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                  -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                • John Beckett
                  ... Good point. I just had a look at a copy of the downloaded file you mentioned (from September 2007). I had been wondering whether it might be useful to
                  Message 8 of 14 , Feb 22, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Tom Link wrote:
                    > When the vimtips were still hosted on vim.sf.net, they were
                    > also made available as plain text file[1] without any mention
                    > of the author. So there was no real agreement at any time
                    > that the tip authors are to be mentioned.

                    Good point. I just had a look at a copy of the downloaded file you
                    mentioned (from September 2007). I had been wondering whether it might
                    be useful to parse the file to extract original author names, but as you
                    say, it has no names at all.

                    > When the tips were transferred to wikia one of those tips I
                    > didn't submit anonymously was misattributed to somebody else
                    > and there is a chance the same thing happened for a couple of
                    > other tips. I don't think I could agree but I also don't
                    > really care that much.

                    That's interesting (sorry!). Many issues occurred during the import, but
                    if you could tell me the tip number(s) I'd like to quickly see if I can
                    figure out what happened.

                    If anyone is aware of a misattribution on the wiki, please email me
                    (reply here, or send direct to me) and I'll see that it is fixed.

                    > Can the whole set of tips be exported somehow?

                    I'll mention what you can do, but it is NOT really helpful (you get
                    wikitext and no easy way to find anything).

                    Wikia take a weekly backup. I occasionally use the following to download
                    a copy:

                    wget http://wikistats.wikia.com/dbdumps/vim/pages_current.xml.gz

                    That expands to a 7MB xml file with all content of the Vim Tips wiki
                    (tips + user pages + templates + talk etc). There is a second file
                    (replace "current" with "full"; it expands to over 40MB) that includes
                    the history of each page. Now all you need is some funky xml parser to
                    extract what you want.

                    I also have a script to download the wikitext of each tip to a separate
                    file. I use that for various maintenance procedures.

                    John


                    --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                    You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                    For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                    -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                  • Tom
                    ... Thanks. I wrote a hackish ruby script that converts the xml dump to a tagged help file. I tried to convert some of the wiki markup (simply with a series of
                    Message 9 of 14 , Feb 23, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > wgethttp://wikistats.wikia.com/dbdumps/vim/pages_current.xml.gz
                      >
                      > That expands to a 7MB xml file with all content of the Vim Tips wiki
                      > (tips + user pages + templates + talk etc).

                      Thanks. I wrote a hackish ruby script that converts the xml dump to a
                      tagged help file. I tried to convert some of the wiki markup (simply
                      with a series of gsubs) so that it's highlighted properly. The output
                      currently weighs about 3.8 MB. I still get a few duplicate tag
                      warnings when running helptags over that file. I'll upload the ruby
                      script to my git vim repos later this week in case somebody is
                      interested -- it uses hpricot for reading the xml.

                      tom.

                      --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                      You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                      -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                    • Tom
                      ... The script can be downloaded from here if somebody is interested. The output isn t perfect but it s okay for me.
                      Message 10 of 14 , Feb 24, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > I wrote a hackish ruby script that converts the xml dump to a
                        > tagged help file.

                        The script can be downloaded from here if somebody is interested. The
                        output isn't perfect but it's okay for me.
                        http://github.com/tomtom/vimtlib/blob/83976d6b1572000b9950241749371206f7e03d59/ruby/vimtips2help.rb

                        Requirements: ruby, hpricot

                        It's only now that I realize how the collection of vimtips has grown
                        in size and quality. Wow.

                        tom.
                        --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                        You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                        For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                        -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                      • _sc_
                        ... i ll buy a cup of coffee for the first person to port tom s script to python/beautifulsoup... sc --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You
                        Message 11 of 14 , Feb 24, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Tuesday 24 February 2009 2:34 am, Tom wrote:
                          >
                          > > I wrote a hackish ruby script that converts the xml dump to a
                          > > tagged help file.
                          >
                          > The script can be downloaded from here if somebody is interested. The
                          > output isn't perfect but it's okay for me.
                          > http://github.com/tomtom/vimtlib/blob/83976d6b1572000b9950241749371206f7e03d59/ruby/vimtips2help.rb
                          >
                          > Requirements: ruby, hpricot

                          i'll buy a cup of coffee for the first person to port tom's script
                          to python/beautifulsoup...

                          sc


                          --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                          You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                          For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                          -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                        • Tony Mechelynck
                          ... I do care about anything I authored, whether good or bad, and sometimes I ve been surprised to find that tips about which I had totally forgotten, had my
                          Message 12 of 14 , Feb 24, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On 22/02/09 01:24, John Beckett wrote:
                            > Each tip on the wiki has a header. We've pruned some of the information
                            > that was originally imported from vim.org, and now we're wondering
                            > whether to also remove the author field.
                            >
                            > The wiki way of dealing with authorship is to use "History", which
                            > records the edit summary, user name, and changes performed by each user.
                            > Wikipedia has thousands of magnificent pages where there is no visible
                            > author.
                            >
                            > On the Vim Tips wiki there are lots of cases where the original tip was
                            > pretty weak, and it's only the subsequent editing on the wiki that has
                            > provided polish. Sometimes we manually remove the author when we notice
                            > that removal appears appropriate, but it's a fairly arbitrary and
                            > time-consuming process.
                            >
                            > To summarise discussions (most recent being [1]):
                            >
                            > * It is unfair to credit some authors when the original tip was
                            > simplistic or defective, and it's been fixed by wiki editors (sometimes
                            > by merging in the imported comments). We should either credit every
                            > significant contributor or none.
                            >
                            > * We could replace "author" with "original author" to clarify its
                            > meaning. The idea is that a contributor shouldn't be discouraged from
                            > editing because some author "owns" the tip, or wonder whether to add
                            > their own name as an author if substantial edits are performed. Of
                            > course, if a tip does have an active author (someone who cares about
                            > it), they are welcome to clean up or remove any inappropriate edits, but
                            > no one owns a tip (if they do, it should be removed from the wiki).
                            >
                            > * I have done a temporary manual edit of one tip[2] to show what
                            > "original author" looks like.
                            >
                            > * Adding words to the header doesn't help the tip. We should clarify
                            > that "version" in the header means "minimum version of Vim required to
                            > use the tip, we think". It might be useful to say "minimum version", but
                            > "original author" doesn't help.
                            >
                            > * We could remove the author field after ensuring that the author's name
                            > is shown in the edit history (by having a script edit each tip to put
                            > "original author NAME" in the summary).
                            >
                            > I am posting to the vim-l (Vim Tips Wiki) and vim_use (Google Groups)
                            > mailing lists to seek opinions on the future of the author field. You
                            > might like to comment on other fields in the header as well.
                            >
                            > The current position favoured by the discussion[1] is that the name of
                            > each author should be copied to an edit summary in the history, and then
                            > the author field should be removed.
                            >
                            > [1] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:JohnBeckett
                            > [2] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Moving_to_matching_braces
                            >
                            > John

                            I do care about anything I authored, whether good or bad, and sometimes
                            I've been surprised to find that tips about which I had totally
                            forgotten, had my name at their top. So I reread them, and kept them in
                            my watchlist (or added them to it if they weren't in it).

                            Also, if I see that a comment is interesting, I don't hesitate to
                            incorporate it into the main tip, sometimes with mention of the
                            commenter if known, especially if interesting enough.

                            If my name is removed from my tips, someday I might come across some
                            minor tip of mine (not one of those whose URIs I regularly post in
                            comments in this ML), not recognise it as mine, and remove it from my
                            watchlist. I leave you judge of whether that would be a good or bad
                            thing. Going back to the oldest entry in the history of a wiki article
                            is not something I usually do.

                            As for replacing "Author" by "Original author", I have no issue with
                            /that/. Maybe it would even be better, considering that the best tips
                            may be those which have been improved by incorporating comments from
                            other people. IIUC it could be done for all tips in one fell swoop, by a
                            minor change in the appropriate template. The Vim ":intro" screen still
                            says "by Bram Moolenaar et al.", doesnt't it, even though many unnamed
                            people have contributed. In this case, I'd say Bram is both the original
                            author and one of the most active (probably the most active, over the
                            whole life of Vim) contributor of bugfixes and other improvements.

                            I'm mentioning my case because that's what I know best, but I suppose
                            there are other people in similar situations regarding the Vim wiki.


                            Best regards,
                            Tony.
                            --
                            You have prepared a proposal for your supervisor. The success of this
                            proposal will mean increasing your salary 20%. In the middle of your
                            proposal your supervisor leans over to look at your report and spits
                            into your coffee. You:

                            (a) Tell him you take your coffee black.

                            (b) Ask him if he has any communicable diseases.

                            (c) Show him who's in command; promptly take a leak in his "In"
                            basket.

                            --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                            You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                            For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                            -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                          • Tony Mechelynck
                            On 22/02/09 16:14, Charles E. Campbell, Jr. wrote: [...] ... [...] Thanks. :-) May I return the compliment? When I come across a tip by Dr. Chip, I read it
                            Message 13 of 14 , Feb 24, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On 22/02/09 16:14, Charles E. Campbell, Jr. wrote:
                              [...]
                              > * Authorship can convey a notion of reliability (or lack thereof). An
                              > article by Tony M would, for example, probably be considered more
                              > trustworthy (authoritative :)) than one from (*-* NOTICE: THE NETPOLICE
                              > HAVE CENSORED SOME INFORMATION AT THIS POINT *-*).
                              [...]

                              Thanks. :-) May I return the compliment? When I come across a tip by Dr.
                              Chip, I read it with much more attention than if it were by just any
                              Tom, Dick, Harry, John Doe, or John Q. Public. (Any names after "more
                              attention than" are purely fictitious; any resemblance of any of them
                              with reality can only exist in the reader's imagination ;-) ).


                              Best regards,
                              Tony.
                              --
                              A continuing flow of paper is sufficient to continue the flow of paper.
                              -- Dyer

                              --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                              You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                              For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                              -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                            • Dennis Benzinger
                              ... There s a specialized MediaWiki parser for Python: http://code.pediapress.com/wiki/wiki Perhaps that s easier to use than beautifulsoup. If you want to get
                              Message 14 of 14 , Feb 24, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Am 24.02.2009 10:02, _sc_ schrieb:
                                > On Tuesday 24 February 2009 2:34 am, Tom wrote:
                                >>
                                >> > I wrote a hackish ruby script that converts the xml dump to a
                                >> > tagged help file.
                                >>
                                >> The script can be downloaded from here if somebody is interested. The
                                >> output isn't perfect but it's okay for me.
                                >> http://github.com/tomtom/vimtlib/blob/83976d6b1572000b9950241749371206f7e03d59/ruby/vimtips2help.rb
                                >>
                                >> Requirements: ruby, hpricot
                                >
                                > i'll buy a cup of coffee for the first person to port tom's script
                                > to python/beautifulsoup...
                                > [...]

                                There's a specialized MediaWiki parser for Python:

                                http://code.pediapress.com/wiki/wiki

                                Perhaps that's easier to use than beautifulsoup.

                                If you want to get the tips as a XML file you can also use the Export
                                pages page <http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Export> and export pages
                                from the categories VimTip and VimTipProposed. By using this page you
                                automatically get only the current revision of the tips.


                                Dennis Benzinger

                                --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
                                You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                                For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                                -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.