[Semi-OT] Which wiki do you like?

Website · Post by **Leaf** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:07 am

Let's try to keep this civil and stick to the a healthly balance of technical facts and personal preferences.

It would appear many people like Media wiki. Why?

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki

what does Media Wiki offer that many other Wiki's do not?

Ex:

Twiki - http://www.twiki.org/
Moin Moin - http://moinmoin.wikiwikiweb.de/
Kwiki - http://www.kwiki.org/
Wiliki - http://www.shiro.dreamhost.com/scheme/wiliki/
Zwiki - http://www.zwiki.org/
JSP Wiki - http://www.jspwiki.org/

Or any others.

Consider this a preview discussion for a future poll.

Thanks.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:14 am

tried them all.

media wiki is ok, looks nice, but as you said in irc it takes up to much resources. so if anyone wants to buy some ram for the server go ahead.

i think JSP Wiki was the best. its simple, fast and looks nice. several others looked 'incomplete'...

JSP Wiki

Rednaxela · Post by **Rednaxela** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:53 am

In my opinion, Mediawiki is the best and most full featured one, however it does take more resources than any other. In terms of why I like it more, it's not any one killer feature, but just a bunch of little features all over the place that make in nicer to use than the others.
From what I've saw of the others, the best looking ones were Moin Moin and TWiki. JSP Wiki just looked slightly bloated to me, though not so much as Mediawiki. (and IMHO, the java centric nature of JSP Wiki is a "Bad Think (tm)"). WiLiKi looks somewhat lacking in features to me. KwikiKwiki also looks interesting. And IMHO Zwiki looks too 'zopeish' to me.

IMHO, any of these are much better than the current wiki thing in use at http://crossfire.freezope.org/

cavesomething · Post by **cavesomething** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:26 am

agreed, zope is horrible, it doesn't have good revision tracking.

the things I want in a wiki are (in order of priority):

a working recent changes list
a watched pages list
LinksThatArentInCamelNotation (zope does support properly spaced links, but hides that fact in its docs)
a way to easily interconnect articles hyperlinks yes, but also catergories and backlinks (zope can do catergories sort of, but it is a hack)
table templates (I assume that most of the documentation wlll move over with time, so being able to construct suitable tables is disirable).

less important:
image support
statistics

from the ones you list there:
moinmoin looks a little primitive (this is from a quick glance, not a through study of the documentation
so does kwiki
I have no Idea what wiliki is about, it seems to be in chinese
JSP looks like it might be interesting if it wasn't java
Twiki looks sufficiantly complex
zwiki is zope, zope are teh suck (there we go, I was getting worried I might be posting something that was actually reasoned and coherent in response to a flamebaiting opportunity, and we couldn't have that now could we

)

bort · Post by **bort** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 3:13 pm

cavesomething wrote: zwiki is zope, zope are teh suck (there we go, I was getting worried I might be posting something that was actually reasoned and coherent in response to a flamebaiting opportunity, and we couldn't have that now could we )

No .... You are flamebaiting.

I've seen my share of "Zope sucks" messages, and if you know what your doing, you can design a better looking, better functioning zope page if you know how to use it.
I know, cause I do.

I think all of you are talking about out-of-box look.
Have you also considered the additional features all of these provide?
And how easy is it to modify, embed, and debug these enviroments.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 3:21 pm

how hard is it to write one? i beleive the current one is pretty raped because it was only supposed to be for the client pulling the pages for 'info' about the current area.

bort: why dont you take over the wiki, and fix it up? then we can see if we really need the new wiki?

cavesomething · Post by **cavesomething** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:45 pm

bort wrote:
cavesomething wrote: zwiki is zope, zope are teh suck (there we go, I was getting worried I might be posting something that was actually reasoned and coherent in response to a flamebaiting opportunity, and we couldn't have that now could we )
No .... You are flamebaiting.

If that were a serious comment, then I might have been, but it wasn't.

bort wrote: I've seen my share of "Zope sucks" messages, and if you know what your doing, you can design a better looking, better functioning zope page if you know how to use it.
I know, cause I do.

Yes, it /can/ be done, just like you /can/ write efficiant code in java, but there comes a point where you just shouldn't. Zwiki (to my mind) doesn't seem to offer any compelling advantages over the others, so if you are arguing for doing a custom design the following questions need to be asked:
1) will you do it?
2) will you (or someone else) maintain it?
3) how will it compare to the feature list I mentioned, and any that anyone else might come up with.

if not then what is to prevent such a system being not noticably better than the current one

bort wrote: I think all of you are talking about out-of-box look.
Have you also considered the additional features all of these provide?
And how easy is it to modify, embed, and debug these enviroments.

Yeah, but the aim isn't to write a wiki, it is to write a gauntlet-like MUD/RPG/MMORPG hybrid

maybe
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Running_ ... eforge.net is a more suitable approach

Website · Post by **Leaf** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:52 pm

cavesomething wrote: maybe
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Running_ ... eforge.net is a more suitable approach

How much of a concern is this?

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Running_ ... nd_privacy

Security and privacy

SourceForge's project web servers use an insecure configuration which allows any other registered developer of any registered project to read your configuration files (including database password) and session data, and to write data into any file or directory you've made writable by the web server. Consider the security and privacy implications before installing a web application such as MediaWiki into your project space.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:59 pm

that doesnt look good. is there anyway to trap it in its own directory/partition? that would be one huge ... hole, or something you contain on a seperate server...

bort · Post by **bort** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Leaf wrote: How much of a concern is this?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Running_ ... nd_privacy

The way they phrase this is that SF always has had this bug.
I guess if you trust your project members, it wouldn't be a huge problem..