[cgiapp] Future of the wiki

[Lyle]

Mark Fuller wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Paul Miller <listmail at voltar-confed.org> wrote:
>   
>>  If the website for it doesn't have some
>> kind of demo and in fact uses mostly PHP code, what good is the lib.
>>     
>
> I understand your point and it has some validity. But, that's not what
> Lyle said, and I was addressing. He said he "loathes Perl sites using
> PHP." That's significantly broader than a library site (for web
> development) using PHP.
>   

Look at www.yabbforum.com, it's a Perl forum script, but it's site is in 
php. I've contacted them about this before, to be told I wasn't the 
first to bring it up. Based on the fact that most people wouldn't even 
bother to contact, I think it's probably putting a lot of people off. 
Yes php is currently more popular than Perl, people actively choosing 
Perl alternatives likely do so because they don't want to use php or 
asp. Having this Perl alternative run php on it's site simply wouldn't 
give the right message.

> However, the dilemma is much the same. A goal to showcase C::A will be
> detrimental to the goals David enumerated at the beginning of this
> topic. There's no way you can realistically create a wiki with the
> features that mediaWiki has. Nor a forum with the features of phpbb
> (if you want to capitalize on the attributes of discussion
> participants to reduce wiki spam.). The fewer the features (and
> community), the fewer people participating as moderators, less robust
> anti-spam techniques, etc.
>   

Why would the cgi-app site need to use all the features of MediaWiki? 
It's a small site and small community. We don't need lots of anti-spam 
features, just a good one that works. MojoMojo isn't feature rich, but 
serves the Catalyst site well.

> I agree that it would be more consistent to have a wiki (and forum)
> written with C::A. But, Lyle said he'd settle for just Perl. So, we've
> already established a level of pragmatism.
>   

I'm a Perl advocate and I don't hide it :D

> Personally, I don't think it undermines C::A's credibility that
> there's not a widespread wiki or forum written in it. Not using the
> best tools just because it would admit reality (that the best tools
> aren't written using C::A) shouldn't be threatening. It's just
> reality. The question, to me, is whether to use the best tools for the
> job (wiki, forum, etc.).
>   

MojoMojo isn't widespread, but it is a Catalyst Wiki, used on the 
Catalyst site.


Lyle