Re: [tlug] wiki

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

josh glover writes:

 > > I think that a DB is actually easier to manage, since it gives you a
 > > standard interface (SQL).

Um?  Maybe.  My preferred DB is ZODB, though (mostly because I never
have to touch it but it gives good performance for my purpose). ;-)
That's an extreme example, but the fact is going to be that the tables
used by one SQL-based wiki are hardly likely to be available in
another, and the markup engines are also likely to differ (and in fact
ZWiki offers about 6 different markup engines, from original wiki and
Moin Moin to Zope Page Templates which allow you to access the
underlying Zope engine directly).

bruno raoult writes:

 > Shell and vi/emacs/whatever_editor are (IMHO) easier.

Used on what?  The character of a wiki that makes it a wiki and not
just a collection of pages is the link database, and the main UI is
through the web, not editors on the server host.  To the extent that
the link database is partly embedded in the pages, that means that
it's probably a bad idea to edit them directly.

                                *****

I think that whatever wiki we pick we're going to be stuck with for a
while.  Wiki content being what it is, it probably isn't so hard to
write the basic scripts to migrate it, but surely there will be corner
cases and "wiki hacks" that the migration will have to deal with.