NetBSD-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Building up a new *user* wiki!


> Who will perform this "final switch"?  When will it happen?  How much 
> content will tentatively be involved?  How much content will end up 
> being *duplicated*?
the final switch could happen anytime, and should be done when is considered usable.

> And... why force users to go through the learning curve of two wiki 
> systems with two different syntaxes?
> >   * ikiwiki is the wiki that should finally be used on My
> > matter with ikiwiki is only that I absolutely don't know it and cannot
> > write perl, and would thus rather take another wiki.
> That's a huge red flag.  Proposing an alternative because you "don't 
> know" (and you are clearly admitting that) is hard to justify and hard 
> to take seriously.  Most likely, you will end up repeating mistakes that 
> have already been solved in the ikiwiki setup and/or realize later on 
> that ikiwiki was not "that bad" when it's too late.
sorry if I didn't clearly wrote down what all this is about.
Every three of the systems has its own merits, with everyone going into
a completely different direction.

For me, the question is: What is the expected usage, with whose effort, and
what and when will be the migration to
If the wiki ends up with only two or three people writing articles, perhaps
the comfort of using fossil and migrating articles per hand would be
If the wiki ends up being a *large* project with many users, articles, etc.,
then having them not to switch when migrating would be preferrable.
If the wiki ends up existing for another few years, then having chosen a
solution that is known to be developed for the next few years would be
preferrable, so Mediawiki.
And then, if it's still up to me administrating it, I'd have liked to choose
an application I want to run.

Then, when the migration should be done, who is the one to migrate the data?
Is it up to me? Then I'd prefer to have something *I* can read, so ikiwiki
with perl is not very useful for that.
If there are few articles anyway (but useful ones), I could as well migrate
data from fossil by hand.
If the old wiki was Mediawiki, but there are many volunteers who'd help
migrating the data to the new wiki, the software of the old one doesn't

This is *not* about technical matters, it's solely about who is going to make
it, with which preferences, and which expectations about user and article
count you do have.

> Amitai has reiterated that getting ready for prime time
> wouldn't involve so much effort.  Why not *at least* investigate this idea
> instead of running away?
As schmonz pointed out, this is a completely different task and much more
work. I just do *not* write perl, and even if I learned, doing it in a way and
complexity to help with that wiki would take ages.

Regards, Julian

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index