Menu
▾
▴
phpwiki-talk
|
From: Thompson, S. <S.D...@te...> - 2010-03-22 19:49:15
|
Hi, I've just installed PhpWiki and I like the simplicity. It's version 1.2.11 - do I have the most recent? Is this even a supported application. It's hard to tell from the stuff I've found on the web. I found this http://wiki.bic.mni.mcgill.ca/index.php/PhpWikiDocumentation but it does not seem to refer to the product I have intstalled. It's a phpwiki but looks a lot better than mine. How is that done? Steve T |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-03-29 12:25:38
|
Thompson, Steve wrote: > I've just installed PhpWiki and I like the simplicity. It's version > 1.2.11 - do I have the most recent? that's the most recent so called "stable" version, but it's outdated afaik. 1.3 is "current". > Is this even a supported application. It's hard to tell from the stuff > I've found on the web. I found this there are better supported Wikis out there. Even the demo site http://phpwiki.sourceforge.net/ is broken since years. I switched to PmWiki for active sites but I have still a PhpWiki running with unmaintained content. I'm just too lazy to convert it, but at least I listen here to learn about upcoming problems (e.g. PHP incompatibilities or security issues). You might have a look at DokuWiki, too. Somewhat different goals than PmWiki's. Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
|
From: Reini U. <ru...@x-...> - 2010-03-29 18:59:25
|
2010/3/29 Oliver Betz <li...@gm...>: > Thompson, Steve wrote: > >> I've just installed PhpWiki and I like the simplicity. It's version >> 1.2.11 - do I have the most recent? > > that's the most recent so called "stable" version, but it's outdated > afaik. 1.2 is not being improved, yes. stable and fast as a rock. but no features at all compared to 1.3 > 1.3 is "current". yes, current svn even contains the 1.4 release candidate. there are just cosmetic changes, a new better sidebar theme, missing. >> Is this even a supported application. It's hard to tell from the stuff >> I've found on the web. I found this sf.net is not being maintained actively. > there are better supported Wikis out there. Even the demo site > http://phpwiki.sourceforge.net/ is broken since years. because phpwiki does not run on this setup and we do not have a shell account anymore.. > I switched to PmWiki for active sites but I have still a PhpWiki > running with unmaintained content. I'm just too lazy to convert it, > but at least I listen here to learn about upcoming problems (e.g. PHP > incompatibilities or security issues). phpwiki has much more features than those two. > You might have a look at DokuWiki, too. Somewhat different goals than > PmWiki's. You cannot really compare apples with trees. -- Reini Urban http://phpwiki.org/ http://murbreak.at/ |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-03-30 08:29:16
|
Reini Urban wrote: [...] > > 1.3 is "current". > > yes, > current svn even contains the 1.4 release candidate. > there are just cosmetic changes, a new better sidebar theme, missing. > > >> Is this even a supported application. It's hard to tell from the stuff > >> I've found on the web. I found this > > sf.net is not being maintained actively. so where is a meaningful PhpWiki website, documentation, community? This list has transported 60 Messages in the past 12 months - one message every six days... I counted some four developers and ten "other" users. > > there are better supported Wikis out there. Even the demo site > > http://phpwiki.sourceforge.net/ is broken since years. > > because phpwiki does not run on this setup and we do not have a shell > account anymore.. > > > I switched to PmWiki for active sites but I have still a PhpWiki > > running with unmaintained content. I'm just too lazy to convert it, > > but at least I listen here to learn about upcoming problems (e.g. PHP > > incompatibilities or security issues). > > phpwiki has much more features than those two. Maybe I don't know enough about the PhpWiki features, because I don't know where to look them up. Could you name some important features of PhpWiki not found in PmWiki? I know * PhpWiki has more database backends, * can show diffs between arbitrary revisions what am I missing? Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
|
From: <rei...@gm...> - 2010-03-30 10:02:14
|
Am 30.03.2010 10:29 schrieb Oliver Betz <li...@gm...>: > Reini Urban wrote: > > sf.net is not being maintained actively. > so where is a meaningful PhpWiki website, documentation, community? There's no website unfortunately. Docs are in http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/doc/ at http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/pgsrc/ > This list has transported 60 Messages in the past 12 months - one > message every six days... I counted some four developers and ten > "other" users. There are two developers only, but many users. Most are behind firewalls, in big cooperate intranet's with thousands of users, well-integrated in larger systems, such as gforge or xapian search. > > > there are better supported Wikis out there. Even the demo site > > > http://phpwiki.sourceforge.net/ is broken since years. > > because phpwiki does not run on this setup and we do not have a shell > > account anymore.. > > > I switched to PmWiki for active sites but I have still a PhpWiki > > > running with unmaintained content. I'm just too lazy to convert it, > > > but at least I listen here to learn about upcoming problems (eg PHP > > > incompatibilities or security issues). > > phpwiki has much more features than those two. > Maybe I don't know enough about the PhpWiki features, because I don't > know where to look them up. Could you name some important features of > PhpWiki not found in PmWiki? * All database backends, all php versions, all major operating systems, not just LAMP with php5. * Many plugins, in my opinion more, better and easier than mediawiki plugins. mediawiki just has easier syntax plugins. * DynamicIncludePages (IncludePage via Ajax to create tree-like structures loaded on demand) * Many login and auth methods, just facebook connect and email verification not yet. * Moderated pages * Semantic relations and queries In contrary to pmwiki's and dokuwiki's design principle: Avoid gratuitous features (or "creeping featurism") we extend it is much as possible with creeping featurism. I also prefer the template inheritance, so that it can easily be extended whilst not breaking HTML conformity, in contrary to mediawiki. > I know > * PhpWiki has more database backends, > * can show diffs between arbitrary revisions > what am I missing? |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-03-30 11:19:06
|
rei...@gm... wrote: > > > sf.net is not being maintained actively. > > so where is a meaningful PhpWiki website, documentation, community? > > There's no website unfortunately. > Docs are in http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/doc/ > at http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/pgsrc/ not appropriate IMNSHO. > > This list has transported 60 Messages in the past 12 months - one > > message every six days... I counted some four developers and ten > > "other" users. > > There are two developers only, but many users. I still see no active "community". [...] > > > phpwiki has much more features than those two. > > Maybe I don't know enough about the PhpWiki features, because I don't > > know where to look them up. Could you name some important features of > > PhpWiki not found in PmWiki? > > * All database backends, all php versions, all major operating systems, not > just LAMP with php5. PmWiki doesn't require LAMP or even PHP5. > * Many plugins, in my opinion more, better and easier than mediawiki > plugins. mediawiki just has easier syntax plugins. For example? Where are these plugins documented? > * DynamicIncludePages (IncludePage via Ajax to create tree-like structures > loaded on demand) Interesting - where can I read more about this? > * Many login and auth methods, just facebook connect and email verification > not yet. Ack. > * Moderated pages ? > * Semantic relations and queries What's this? Where can I read more? > In contrary to pmwiki's and dokuwiki's design principle: Avoid gratuitous > features (or "creeping featurism") Ack, the PmWiki core (240kBytes) has no featurism. There are many extensions, but you can do many things with core functionality. > we extend it is much as possible with creeping featurism. So you consider creeping featurism in the core good? > I also prefer the template inheritance, so that it can easily be extended Don't know about "template inheritance" - where can I read more? Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
|
From: Morgan A. <mo...@ma...> - 2010-03-30 12:03:02
|
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Oliver Betz <li...@gm...> wrote: > > rei...@gm... wrote: > >> There's no website unfortunately. >> Docs are in http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/doc/ >> at http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/pgsrc/ > > not appropriate IMNSHO. [snip] >> * Many plugins, in my opinion more, better and easier than mediawiki >> plugins. mediawiki just has easier syntax plugins. > > For example? Where are these plugins documented? I have to agree, I found it very unprofessional and off-putting that there's no website with documentation, esp. not one running on your own software! I inherited a very old install of PhpWiki that I couldn't easily migrate to a newer version and it didn't survive a required upgrade to PHP 5. I did get a little support here at the time, but responses were extremely slow since the community is so small. And without even basic documentation, I had little interest in pursuing the project. Someday I'll get an old copy of apache & PHP running so I can try to recover all the data in it, but it's really a shame. Morgan --- http://www.makkintosshu.com/ |
|
From: Reini U. <ru...@x-...> - 2010-03-30 15:00:09
|
2010/3/30 Morgan Aldridge <mo...@ma...>: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Oliver Betz <li...@gm...> wrote: >> >> rei...@gm... wrote: >> >>> There's no website unfortunately. >>> Docs are in http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/doc/ >>> at http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/pgsrc/ >> >> not appropriate IMNSHO. > > There are two developers only, but many users. > I still see no active "community". Yes, as I said, it's not visible here. I'm still presenting phpwiki on various wiki conferences and barcamps, but as Patrick Michaud, the pmwiki developer, we have more to do with our perl compiler projects, Patrick for perl6, me for perl5, besides our real work as knowledge engineers. Marc-Etienne has his users behind the Alcatel-Lucent firewall, my users are behind the AVL firewall. Both are companies with >2500 developers. I believe Google or Zend have less developers if you want to play the number game. >>> * Many plugins, in my opinion more, better and easier than mediawiki >>> plugins. mediawiki just has easier syntax plugins. >> >> For example? Where are these plugins documented? Every plugin has its help page. You can e.g. see them at http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/pgsrc/ at Help%2F*Plugin Doesn't look too hard to find. > I have to agree, I found it very unprofessional and off-putting that > there's no website with documentation, esp. not one running on your > own software! Install it and browse the Help esp. for the plugins Not every applications needs an online demo site. We would like to have some demo site online again, but we need a server. Since we are not at the university anymore, rather in big companies we don't have such a server ready. > I inherited a very old install of PhpWiki that I couldn't easily > migrate to a newer version and it didn't survive a required upgrade to > PHP 5. I did get a little support here at the time, but responses were > extremely slow since the community is so small. And without even basic > documentation, I had little interest in pursuing the project. > > Someday I'll get an old copy of apache & PHP running so I can try to > recover all the data in it, but it's really a shame. > > Morgan BTW: All this is no user support. A user would have found it by himself. And we really don't need to persuade others to use it. Install it, try it out, through it away. You are free. |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-03-31 13:17:11
|
rei...@gm... wrote: [...PmWiki and DokuWiki als alternative...] note that I did intentionally not mention MediaWiki. It's made for Wikipedia and not for general use. > > > phpwiki has much more features than those two. I don't think so. > > Maybe I don't know enough about the PhpWiki features, because I don't > > know where to look them up. Could you name some important features of > > PhpWiki not found in PmWiki? > > * All database backends, all php versions, all major operating systems, not > just LAMP with php5. Ack (as I wrote). > * Many plugins, in my opinion more, better and easier than mediawiki > plugins. mediawiki just has easier syntax plugins. I don't know MediaWiki, but many PhpWiki plugins are simply not needed in PmWiki. I see not many plugins providing functionality not present in PmWiki. And the documentation of the PhpWiki plugins is definitely worse, so I doubt "easier". > * DynamicIncludePages (IncludePage via Ajax to create tree-like structures > loaded on demand) Can't find useful documentation about this even in SVN. > * Many login and auth methods, just facebook connect and email verification > not yet. Ack. > * Moderated pages The help page says no more than "short description" (as on many other help pages). I included <?plugin ModeratedPage ?> in a page and didn't notice a difference. So I can't check how it works. BTW: PmWiki also knows "draft" edits and user permissions to "publish". > * Semantic relations and queries Reading Help/SemanticRelations, I don't fully understand the difference between relation::pagename and attribute:=value. PmWiki also knows page text variables and has extensive capabilities to use them, e.g. in page lists or conditionals. A very powerful feature. [...] > I also prefer the template inheritance, so that it can easily be extended > whilst not breaking > HTML conformity, in contrary to mediawiki. You might want to have a look at the PmWiki templates. Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-03-31 13:17:12
|
Reini Urban wrote: > > There are two developers only, but many users. > > > I still see no active "community". > > Yes, as I said, it's not visible here. where is it visible? Maybe... > I'm still presenting phpwiki on various wiki conferences and barcamps, > but as Patrick Michaud, the pmwiki developer, we have more to do with > our perl compiler projects, Patrick for perl6, me for perl5, besides > our real work as knowledge engineers. > > Marc-Etienne has his users behind the Alcatel-Lucent firewall, my > users are behind the AVL firewall. Both are companies with >2500 > developers. ...in these two companies? So PhpWiki became a somewhat private thing? > I believe Google or Zend have less developers if you want to play the > number game. I don't understand what you want to express here. > >>> * Many plugins, in my opinion more, better and easier than mediawiki > >>> plugins. mediawiki just has easier syntax plugins. > >> > >> For example? Where are these plugins documented? > > Every plugin has its help page. Well, most of them are not really helpful to me, and I guess there are other "clueless" users. > You can e.g. see them at > http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/pgsrc/ > at Help%2F*Plugin > Doesn't look too hard to find. How should the average user guess the SVN path? There is not even a link to the SVN repository on the web page. The average user might try to install the "stable" (read: old) or "current" version and see the documentation coming with the installation files. In this documentation, there are many links to the broken sourceforge PhpWiki site. > Not every applications needs an online demo site. But it needs much more documentation. The old PhpWiki site had some extended documentation, and now it's gone. The "community" has no place to add knowledge today. > We would like to have some demo site online again, but we need a > server. Since we are not at the university anymore, rather in big > companies we don't have such a server ready. and the big companies don't want to support the open source project they get benefit from? Some server space would be peanuts for them. [...] > BTW: All this is no user support. > A user would have found it by himself. I disagree strongly. > And we really don't need to persuade others to use it. That seems to be the point. IMO PhpWiki is no more a public supported and used project. That's sad. Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
|
From: Reini U. <ru...@x-...> - 2010-03-31 15:53:14
|
Oliver Betz schrieb: > Reini Urban wrote: >>> There are two developers only, but many users. >> >>> I still see no active "community". >> >> Yes, as I said, it's not visible here. > > where is it visible? Maybe... Between 50 and 100 messages per month is not so bad. https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=phpwiki-talk In the last two years it settled because users went away. But new features and fixes are still happening in the same pace as before. >> I'm still presenting phpwiki on various wiki conferences and barcamps, >> but as Patrick Michaud, the pmwiki developer, we have more to do with >> our perl compiler projects, Patrick for perl6, me for perl5, besides >> our real work as knowledge engineers. >> >> Marc-Etienne has his users behind the Alcatel-Lucent firewall, my >> users are behind the AVL firewall. Both are companies with>2500 >> developers. > > ...in these two companies? So PhpWiki became a somewhat private > thing? It's still open and free. It's still on sourceforge, though sf sucks. >> I believe Google or Zend have less developers if you want to play the >> number game. > > I don't understand what you want to express here. > >>>>> * Many plugins, in my opinion more, better and easier than mediawiki >>>>> plugins. mediawiki just has easier syntax plugins. >>>> >>>> For example? Where are these plugins documented? >> >> Every plugin has its help page. > > Well, most of them are not really helpful to me, and I guess there > are other "clueless" users. > >> You can e.g. see them at >> http://phpwiki.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/phpwiki/trunk/pgsrc/ >> at Help%2F*Plugin >> Doesn't look too hard to find. > > How should the average user guess the SVN path? There is not even a > link to the SVN repository on the web page. The average user has his installation or link to the wiki, and does not need svn. > The average user might try to install the "stable" (read: old) or > "current" version and see the documentation coming with the > installation files. In this documentation, there are many links to > the broken sourceforge PhpWiki site. This is via interwiki links, and the new installations changed Help: to Help/ >> Not every applications needs an online demo site. > > But it needs much more documentation. The old PhpWiki site had some > extended documentation, and now it's gone. The "community" has no > place to add knowledge today. The community can ask to add to the official docu via email or svn. Almost every SW development happens like this. We were just lucky to have a demo on sf.net. >> We would like to have some demo site online again, but we need a >> server. Since we are not at the university anymore, rather in big >> companies we don't have such a server ready. > > and the big companies don't want to support the open source project > they get benefit from? Some server space would be peanuts for them. Not really. Big companies are different. They rather pay for a commercial SW millions than support a cheap open source SW. My company paid millions for MS Sharepoint Server license, and it still has only 10% of the phpwiki features. They also pay millions for Oracle while a really good and fast database would be free. > [...] > >> BTW: All this is no user support. >> A user would have found it by himself. > > I disagree strongly. > >> And we really don't need to persuade others to use it. > > That seems to be the point. IMO PhpWiki is no more a public supported > and used project. The main problem is the server. I don't want to afford one, I asked several times, but no one sprang in. So there will be no demo site. It's also easier to keep it spam-free this way. > That's sad. Indeed. -- Reini Urban http://phpwiki.org/ http://murbreak.at/ |
|
From: Joel U. <uck...@no...> - 2010-03-31 23:12:45
|
Thus spake "Oliver Betz": > > > And we really don't need to persuade others to use it. > > That seems to be the point. IMO PhpWiki is no more a public supported > and used project. > > That's sad. For the record, the all the things you're saying here sum up why I gave up on contributing to PhpWiki some years ago. -- J. |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-04-01 08:53:45
|
Reini Urban wrote: > >>> I still see no active "community". > >> > >> Yes, as I said, it's not visible here. > > > > where is it visible? Maybe... > > Between 50 and 100 messages per month is not so bad. that was long, long ago. So this should read "_was_ not bad". > https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=phpwiki-talk > In the last two years it settled because users went away. More than two years. That's the problem I'm writing about. I don't want to degrade your work on PhpWiki - I thank you that you took over PhpWiki maintenance (I'm still running a 2006 version where you already contributed). But the website and "we really don't need to persuade others to use it. Install it, try it out, through it away. You are free." confirm my impression that PhpWiki is now just for few "insiders" but not recommendable for the average user. Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
|
From: Thompson, S. <S.D...@te...> - 2010-04-01 09:06:21
|
Having started this thread (I'm the new user) I've followed it and occasionally become confused. However, thanks to the comments I can now see clearly that, as an average user with some tech skills (but only average) that phpwiki is not a piece of software I should pursue the use of. I came to it via my Cpanel in Fantastico and it looked promising. It still looks promising but the promise is unfulfilled. I shall suggest that my ISP remove it from the Fantasico offering. It's all well and good to say users may stumble upon it and use it or not, try it out, it's free. No actually, it's not free - it costs the user time to figure it out and seek support and documentation and if these things are not easily found then the time wasted by the potential user can build up. IMHO I think this product should be moved away from public view where it can be stumbled upon and trialed to the frustration and eventual abandonment of the user. I don't quite know what the references to the 1000's of folks behind a firewall meant but perhaps this is where this software should go - behind a firewall. I hope I've not upset anyone with my comments, this is not my intention, it's quite possible I've misunderstood many things. Steve T On 01/04/2010 09:53, "Oliver Betz" <li...@gm...> wrote: Reini Urban wrote: > >>> I still see no active "community". > >> > >> Yes, as I said, it's not visible here. > > > > where is it visible? Maybe... > > Between 50 and 100 messages per month is not so bad. that was long, long ago. So this should read "_was_ not bad". > https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=phpwiki-talk > In the last two years it settled because users went away. More than two years. That's the problem I'm writing about. I don't want to degrade your work on PhpWiki - I thank you that you took over PhpWiki maintenance (I'm still running a 2006 version where you already contributed). But the website and "we really don't need to persuade others to use it. Install it, try it out, through it away. You are free." confirm my impression that PhpWiki is now just for few "insiders" but not recommendable for the average user. Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Phpwiki-talk mailing list Php...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpwiki-talk |
|
From: Manuel V. <man...@gm...> - 2010-04-01 11:01:58
|
Hi all, Just my 2 cents here. PhpWiki is packaged with Codendi forge too and it does the job pretty well since years. Users mainly complains that "it doesn't look like DokuWiki/MediaWiki/..." and the default theme is a bit outdated but, at the end of the day, they can work and that's what matters. IMHO, PhpWiki would deserve more regular releases, as only developers can tell if at a given point the product is (more or less) stable or not. For instance, we would like to upgrade but the latest 1.3 release is 2 years old. I don't think PhpWiki is dead or should be hidden from the face of internet. It's open source, developers & communities come and leave, let's each one decide to use it or not. Cheers, Manuel |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-04-03 08:55:11
|
Manuel Vacelet wrote: [...] > I don't think PhpWiki is dead or should be hidden from the face of internet. > It's open source, developers & communities come and leave, let's each > one decide to use it or not. to avoid misunderstandings: I didn't want to say that PhpWiki is dead and should be "hidden from the face of internet". I just said that if it is not more attractively presented, it will not get users. Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
|
From: Oliver B. <li...@gm...> - 2010-04-21 07:54:36
|
Reini Urban wrote: [...] > > there are better supported Wikis out there. Even the demo site > > http://phpwiki.sourceforge.net/ is broken since years. > > because phpwiki does not run on this setup and we do not have a shell > account anymore.. BTW: Are you sure that PhpWiki still doesn't run on SF? As far as I know, there is again a writeable and backed-up directory ("persistent") in SF project web space. Oliver -- Oliver Betz, Muenchen |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X