4 ms·
I don't understand why are corporations obsessed with decommissioning wikis. When I was at Red Hat, they tried to decommission local country wiki in favor of th
by klohto 6y ago
I don't understand why are corporations obsessed with decommissioning wikis.
When I was at Red Hat, they tried to decommission local country wiki in favor of their company-wide wiki (Mojo, absolute shit by the way).
They tried for about 2 years, then finally somebody said "what the fuck are we doing" and the migration was stopped. I believe the banner "Decommissioning soon" still hangs there.
- chii 6y agosomebody (usually some kind of middle manager) needs to have projects to look after, otherwise it would show that they are dead weights.
- MattGaiser 6y agoUsually, someone saw a cool feature they wanted and everything moved to that. So often the main purpose of storing information gets lost to flashy new graphics.
- schnable 6y agoWhat happens is that different teams build out their own wikis , or come in via acquisition). The company then ends up with a dozen of them, and re-orgs occur and a single team now has two wikis, and people wonder why the information isn't centralized. Everyone agrees it will be great to have a singe company wide wiki and the project is born.
- breischl 6y agoFinding the right information is already difficult and a time-suck. Adding an extra place to look (and search interface, etc) for no extra value just makes it suck more. Plus there's all the TCO reasons - licensing costs, extra servers, extra maintenance, etc etc. You could also look at it as "Don't Repeat Yourself" writ large.
- novok 6y agoI've seen a engineering wiki migration done in 3 months at another bigco. Getting documentation off google docs on the other hand seems impossible from a behavior standpoint :(