Jump to content

Alternate wiki-implementations: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
(restoring legitimate criticisms of worthless SourceForge non-feedback mechanisms and impossibility of submitting bug reports, compressing the rest,)
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Wiki code''' enables the [[Content Wiki]] and [[Opinion Wiki]].  Choices we make about it will guide the [[Consumerium Software License]] and likely also the [[software development process]] - probably in ways we can't easily change or undo later.  With so many '''alternate wiki implementations''' out there, it is important to sort through the advantages and disadvantages of each.
'''Wiki code''' enables the [[Research Wiki]] and [[Publish Wiki]].  Choices we make about it will guide the [[Consumerium Software License]] and likely also the [[software development process]] - probably in ways we can't easily change or undo later.  With so many '''alternate wiki implementations''' out there, it is important to sort through the advantages and disadvantages of each.


This starts by considering the [[wikitext standard]] that our present text is in:  Currently 3 out of 20 of our registered users are registered [[MediaWiki]] developers, which makes our percentage of developers among users '''15%''', which is likely the highest figure any public MediaWiki installation can boost so that is an good incentive to try to adapt MediaWiki for our use over other wikis.  However they might just be here ''because'' we are using MediaWiki, so, it is important to make clear that one of the things the [[R&D Wiki]] is doing is ''choosing'' what technology best fits our [[hardware requirements]] later.
This starts by considering the [[wikitext standard]] that our present text is in:  Currently 3 out of 20 of our registered users are registered [[MediaWiki]] developers, which makes our percentage of developers among users '''15%''', which is likely the highest figure any public MediaWiki installation can boost so that is an good incentive to try to adapt MediaWiki for our use over other wikis.  However they might just be here ''because'' we are using MediaWiki, so, it is important to make clear that one of the things the [[R&D Wiki]] is doing is ''choosing'' what technology best fits our [[hardware requirements]] later.
Line 16: Line 16:


<td>
<td>
*Not humanly possible for [[end user feedback]] to reach developers reliably
*Not humanly possible for [[end user feedback]] to reach developers reliably, though [[Meta-Wikipedia]] has some channels experienced [[trolls]] can exploit
*PHP based
*PHP based
*Proven to perform well under heavy load - but with hard limits
*Proven to perform well under heavy load - but with hard limits
Line 27: Line 27:
</td>
</td>
<td>
<td>
GetWiki is a [[fork]] of MediaWiki
GetWiki is a [[fork]] of MediaWiki under [[CC-nc-sa]]
*same de facto [[wikitext standard]]
*same de facto [[wikitext standard]]
* Auto-import of Wikipedia articles via [[XML]] using [[PHP programming language|PHP]]'s [[Expat]] Library
* Auto-import of Wikipedia articles via [[XML]] using [[PHP programming language|PHP]]'s [[Expat]] Library
Anonymous user
We use only those cookies necessary for the functioning of the website.