Official discussion of wiki merging

Micah
Micah
edited February 2008 in Feature Requests

Comments

  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    *Updated 2008-04-15* - Haven't had any complaints :) So, I'll unsticky this thread and let it fall in amongst its comrades.

    *Updated 2008-02-17* - We went through with the data merger and it worked for all of my wiki pages (Kensing campaign). If you experience any issues, let me know immediately.

    *Updated 2008-02-16* - New plan to merge the wikis.

    For a while now, I've wanted to move away from the 2 wiki structure (1 for all, 1 for dm) and instead combine the two. I'm not sure when I'll have a chance to get to it, but I wanted to get input from everyone before I started. Here's what I'm proposing:

    h4. GM-only pages

    When editing a page, the GM will have an option to make that page visible only to the GM. It can be linked to from other pages normally, but will deny access to anyone except the GM.

    h4. GM-only section per-page

    Also, there will be a second text area for GM-only info, similar to NPCs. Essentially, the wiki page will display in two sections, the top "public" area, and the bottom "GM-only" area.

    This will allow the GM to annotate important, secret info for wiki pages that they want to keep close to the original info, but keep private from the players. For a specific example (that I want really bad!), you could list the detailed treasure for an adventure in the adventure log post, but keep it secret. Once the players identify an item, it will be easy to remember what it actually was, as long as you can remember where and when they got it.

    h4. Migration of GM-wiki pages to party wiki

    The -current- new plan (thanks to Wyrmul and RobJustice) is to automatically move all GM-wiki pages to the party wiki, making each migrated page GM only. In the case of naming conflicts (you have the same named page in both wikis), then all the text from the GM-wiki page will be inserted into the GM-only section of the party wiki page.

    This will preserve all the linking (in theory...). I have tested the merge on the testing server several times, and it has worked like a charm every time. However, being paranoid like I am, I will be keeping a database backup from immediately prior to the merging. If anything catastrophic happens, we will be able to rollback the changes and return to the previous data.

    I will need all of your help on this. Once the merge is complete, go in and poke around on your wikis, making sure everything survived. If there are small errors here and there, that's acceptable. However, significant data loss will result in a rollback. I'll be the one to make that determination.

    h4. GM wikis will still be around (for a while), just invisible

    Assuming that at least something small will go wrong, we will not be immediately deleting the GM wikis. Instead, they will remain, but there won't be any links to them. You can get to yours like so:

    www.obsidianportal.com/campaign/my-campaign-name-here/wiki/dm-web

    Basically, just insert 'dm-web' instead of 'campaign-web'

    *Do not update these pages after the merger!!!* We're keeping them around in case almost everything transfers, but some stuff doesn't make it. In that case, we'll ask you to move it manually. However, we will not merge them again, so edits after the merge will be lost when we delete those wikis.


    h4. Timeline

    The merging will occur at 11:00 EST on Sunday Feb 17th. The actual merging should only take about 10 minutes, so please refrain from doing anything during that time. If you do, there's a (small) chance that your changes will be lost. In fact, I may bring the site completely down just to make sure everything goes smoothly.
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    Note: These changes would affect the adventure logs as well, since they're actually part of the wiki. Therefore, you would get a private GM-only section on each post. Great for planning, IMHO.
  • DMaple
    DMaple
    Posts: 63
    The GM only section on Adventure Logs would be handy to note what key NPCs might be doing off camera. So you know what they get up while the PCs are doing what appears in the log. Or for noting unforeseen (at least by the PCs) consequences of the players actions.
  • Figment
    Figment
    Posts: 132
    I love the idea of being able to flag wiki pages as GM only or not, that way I can create a wiki page long before the party knows of it, then when they've encountered the location, item, orangaization, or whatnot I can unflag it, keeping secret stuff in the GM only section. Currently I have to html link between the two wikis, so being able to textile link will be of a great help as well. Finally, I've been wanting to annotate XP awards in the Adventure Logs, but didn't want the deadlink to a GM page. A GM-only section on Adventure Logs would solve this problem, as well as allow me to do the various things DMaple mentions above. _Thank you_ well in advance.
  • redstar
    redstar
    Posts: 119
    I know I already made a plug for this feature before, but just wanted to add that I think this will a very large step in the right direction for the site.

    Amount of work vs. usability is always an important question for developers and DMs alike (come on, we've all spend 2hrs working on an npc that was either ignored or killed outright in 1 round...) In regards to this feature though, I think a lot of users will benefit greatly from tracking XP, notes, planning, duplications, etc.

    I'm sure you guys will do a great job. Thanks again!
  • wyrmul
    wyrmul
    Posts: 36
    I typically plan on having both the DM wiki and the Player wiki to have the same name when talking on the same subject. When the two are merged instead of producing two pages would it be impossible to put the dm stuff in the dm field and the player stuff in the player field as opposed to creating two similarly named pages? Once this change happens I will be doing just that manually anyway.
  • RobJustice
    RobJustice
    Posts: 178
    I agree with wyrmul there, I have duplicate entries commonly as well. If there was a merge instead or a re-name it sure would save me a ton of time. And honestly, I can't think of a reason not to merge... I mean... if there are two Pistol sections in each wiki, I'm pretty sure their covering very very similar information.
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    Merge with GM text going into the GM section is a great idea. It shouldn't be any harder than the other plan I had, and should actually be a little easier.

    Thanks for the idea!
  • RobJustice
    RobJustice
    Posts: 178
    Thats what we're here for, pointing our your shortcomings and telling you superior ways of doing things.

    Well, most likely its because we like the site but I'm sure tossing criticism is on some people's list.
  • buhrger
    buhrger
    Posts: 4
    sounds great! looking forward to it!
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    I just executed the data migration. It worked like a charm on all my wiki pages. Please report any problems ASAP!
  • Charsen
    Charsen
    Posts: 85
    Hey Micah. I'm not sure if this related to the merging, but I just noticed it. If you go to someone's profile and then click on a character or item listed in the table at the bottom of the profile (not the list), the link is broken. But you can go to the items and characters from other pages, just not linked from profiles. Campaign links still work though. Otherwise I haven't noticed any problems since the merge! :)
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    Not related, but good to know anyway.
  • buhrger
    buhrger
    Posts: 4
    the merge looks great! thanks! one tiny request: when i looked at a page of planning notes that got merged over from the DM wiki, it of course showed all the text as "public", because it hadn't been put in the DM only field. i, of course, briefly panicked "what?!? all my players can see my note?!?", and then noticed that the entire page was flagged as DM only. thus the request:

    could pages that are only viewable by the DM have some sort of icon up near the top to indicate that they're locked?
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    I'm glad it worked for you! I'm chewing my fingernails waiting for some sort of "All my stuff is gone!!!!" type report.

    Yeah, some sort of gm-only indicator is a good idea. I'll add it to the TODO list.
  • RobJustice
    RobJustice
    Posts: 178
    ALL MY STUFF IS GONE!!!!



    Haha, no everything went fine. I just wanted to see if I could incite mass panic and hysteria.
  • Figment
    Figment
    Posts: 132
    I had a GM page merged so that it was Public but not flagged as GM-Only, but it was easily fixed and not something I was overly worried about my players seeing. Otherwise, everything looks good. Thank you for this most awesome of changes!
  • outrider
    outrider
    Posts: 46
    I to would like to add thanks for this. I wasnt using the dm wiki because of the switching back and forth so now its way easier to deal with things instead of remembering it in my notes.
  • FemmeLegion
    FemmeLegion
    Posts: 521
    I just wanted to say thanks for the GM-only section on wiki pages. I'm using it because I have my hastily jotted down notes for a session, and they're visible right below the last bits of my brilliantly crafted narratives so I can remember where I left off. =P

    (ObPlug: I'm writing up narratives for "The Vale". Please don't ask me why I offered to be that crazy; I don't know anymore. =)
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    Thanks to all for ... the thanks. That sounds kind of strange.

    I really hoped this merging would make the wikis much more useful, and it surely has for me at least. It sounds like it worked as well for all of you.
Sign In or Register to comment.

May 2022
Revenge on the Kraken's Bane

Read the feature post on the blog
Return to Obsidian Portal

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Discussions