[cgiapp] Future of the wiki (was: Re: CGI::Application wiki page Examples)

Fri Jan 29 00:42:56 EST 2010

Yes, MT4 is not a wiki, but do we really need a wiki for now?
Classically, MT4's model is that of a blog, but because it offers
multiple users to contribute, and offers an extensive amount of
administrative control, it is really more like a CMS. Nevertheless,
all that is terminology. The fact is -- it is a modern, secure, nicely
designed, and constantly maintained publishing system that is created
in Perl by one of the well known Perl-personalities, Ben Trott. MT4
could allow someone, say, Mark, be the administrator (just using
Mark's name as an example here), who could appoint some of the more
prolific content contributors as authors, and then add more authors on
a case-by-case basis. By the way, MT4 has a static publishing model --
it generates static html pages, so once the pages have been generated,
there is little "pressure" on the server. The only live pages on a
standard MT4 install are for searches. It comes with a zeroconf
database by way of SQLite, and is really easy to get started with.

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Gurunandan R. Bhat
<guru at informationmatters.in> wrote:
> I had offered Mark to port content on the wiki to Movable Type a few
> months earlier.
> At that time, Mark had very valid concerns - that MT does not offer key
> features required of a wiki.
> But that was MT4 and a re-evaluation of MT after the release of MT5
> recently might be interesting.
>
> Regards
> Gurunandan
>
>
>
> On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 22:02 -0600, P Kishor wrote:
>
>> top posting -- MovableType is a worthy candidate for a Perl-based CMS
>> that also has a good security. Once again, a few folks can have the
>> keys to operate it, and others can ask for it on an as needed basis.
>> Perhaps, only those who have been on this mailing list for a certain
>> period of time can be authorized. Or, some other means for
>> double-checking the intent of the potential editors/posters.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:47 PM, P Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Mark Stosberg <mark at summersault.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> The idea was that the 315 subscribers to this mailing list are the only
>> >>> people in the world with the slightest motivation to delete spam from
>> >>> the wiki and, since its not a terribly thriving, active wiki, even we
>> >>> members of the cgiapp community don't visit it all that much.
>> >>>
>> >>> So my hope was that by having these messages come to the list would
>> >>> remind people that the Wiki exists, "ping" them that people contribute
>> >>> to it, and maybe spark enough curiosity that someone checks to see what
>> >>> was edited, and in the process, is able to find and fix spam.
>> >>
>> >> In my case, this has been working, and I have been visiting more. I
>> >> don't really mind the notices right now, but I can also understand that
>> >> the mailing list could feel like a drag if the quality of discourse was
>> >> lowered to primarily being terse automated messages about wiki updates.
>> >>
>> >> It seems like a nice option to be enabled per-user, but then I'm not
>> >> sure I want to see all the automated updates in my personal inbox...
>> >>
>> >>> It's my last attempt to save the Wiki.  If it continues to be used more
>> >>> by spammers than the community, then it is not really worth the time and
>> >>> trouble involved in continuing to operate it.  If, as I hope, these
>> >>> messages help spur the community to step up and contribute and help
>> >>> maintain and police the thing, then we'll be able to continue to have a
>> >>> Wiki for the foreseeable future!
>> >>
>> >> Since I do some website admin work myself, I also appreciate this
>> >> sentiment.
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps the wiki would be more interesting to use if we used a different
>> >> wiki engine. Kwiki is written in Perl, but certainly never took off and
>> >> seems to lack some features that seem standard in wikis now. For
>> >> example, it seems like a large flaw that it offers no way to enter a
>> >> short message explaining *why* a change would made.
>> >>
>> >> Other alternatives I'm familiar with include MediaWiki (PHP...), Trac
>> >> (Python...) or and gitit (Haskell...). There was some interest in
>> >> building a wiki based on CGI::Application, but that hasn't materialized.
>> >> I'm sad to say that there's not a Perl-based wiki that I'm aware of as
>> >> becoming prosperous and popular. For me, open-source vs. closed-source
>> >> is ultimately a greater concern, and I could put aside language
>> >> preferences and use another open source option.
>> >>
>> >> But back to the fundamental question: If the wiki was overhauled, would
>> >> you use it and maintain it more?
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Both David and you make important points, and I too empathize with
>> > David's sentiments. Allow me to say "from the hip" at the risk of
>> > being accused of "if you complain then do something about it." I hope
>> > the community view the following in the spirit that it is offered --
>> > constructive feedback.
>> >
>> > The cgi-app wiki is a very valuable resource, but is an outdated and
>> > old-school looking resource. Actually, such seems to be the public
>> > facing problem of most of perl-based incarnations -- perlmonks still
>> > lives in dark ages although there have been many meditations on
>> > overhauling it; heck, even the perl6 site looks goofy and not modern
>> > at all. I downloaded Rakudo Perl, and am blown away by the language.
>> > It looks be a fantastic incarnation when it arrives production ready.
>> > But that Camelia spokesbug and the amateurish, nay, un-designed
>> > rounded rectangles on the front-page with the center-piece being a
>> > button that can't make up its mind whether it wants to be rounded or
>> > square cornered, Perl6 website looks like it is for a totally
>> > un-serious tool.
>> >
>> > Compare these to stuff made with RoR, or the regular rubylang site, or
>> > the jQuery site, or sites showcasing stuff made with jQuery. They all
>> > look and feel modern. Ajaxy bits, nice logos, good color schemes.
>> > cgi-app.org is actually one of the better ones of the perl family. I
>> > just wish it were even more modern and better.
>> >
>> > It would definitely behoove if cgi-app.org were running a protected
>> > wiki written in cgi-app. I would rather the keys to the wiki were with
>> > only a few chosen ones as long as I could ask them for it in case I
>> > wanted to add or update a page or a how-to. Perhaps editing of the
>> > wiki could be allowed only by those who are members of this mailing
>> > list. That would be some measure of control that they are benevolent,
>> > or at least benign humans. Until a wiki based on cgi-app can be made
>> > by someone, there indeed are other Perl-based wiki that can serve very
>> > well -- Twiki especially comes to mind. Oddmuse is a nice looking one,
>> > and is hugely simple to implement, but may not offer the security
>> > desired.
>> >
>> > Ok. Enough of what seems like a rant (I iterate, it is not meant to be
>> > a rant). Here are some immediate suggestions --
>> >
>> > 1. Implement a Perl-based wiki that is still being developed and has
>> > not been abandoned. This should be a stop-gap measure until a cgi-app
>> > based wiki is developed (if it is not developed, so be it... at least
>> > the cgi-app site would be running Perl).
>> >
>> > 2. Modernize the site bringing it in line with jQuery or RoR websites
>> > with modern color schemes, Ajaxy goodness, and clean URLs.
>> >
>> > 3. Update and offer Mark Rajcok's turnkey web application as a
>> > best-of-breed example, modernizing and improving it where needed.
>> > Heck, perhaps that application itself can be used as the basis for a
>> > new cgi-app presence. It is a nice, well documented, and half-decent
>> > looking application. I have benefited from it, and believe others
>> > would also benefit from it.
>> >
>> > Alright. I am sure I have said way more than I should have, but I hope
>> > you all will consider at least some of the substance of my critique,
>> > and not just flame me for it.
>> >
>> > Thanks for building a great tool and providing it for others.
>> > Maintenance of it is an onerous but worthy task.
>> >
>> > Puneet.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> #####  CGI::Application community mailing list  ################
> ##                                                            ##
> ##  To unsubscribe, or change your message delivery options,  ##
> ##  visit:  http://lists.openlib.org/mailman/listinfo/cgiapp    ##
> ##                                                            ##
> ##  Web archive:   http://lists.openlib.org/pipermail/cgiapp/   ##
> ##  Wiki:          http://cgiapp.erlbaum.net/                 ##
> ##                                                            ##
> ################################################################
>
>

-- 
Puneet Kishor http://www.punkish.org
Carbon Model http://carbonmodel.org
Charter Member, Open Source Geospatial Foundation http://www.osgeo.org
Science Commons Fellow, http://sciencecommons.org/about/whoweare/kishor
Nelson Institute, UW-Madison http://www.nelson.wisc.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Assertions are politics; backing up assertions with evidence is science
=======================================================================
Sent from Madison, Wisconsin, United States