Some Wiki evaluations (finally!)

Anderson Lizardo lizardo at
Mon Apr 12 17:14:33 PDT 2004

Em Seg 12 Abr 2004 11:25, Jeroen Coumans escreveu:
> Anderson Lizardo said the following on 04/12/04 06:11:
> > 1. PhpWiki
> > Conclusion: I suggest we don't use it as our main wiki installation (i.e.
> > to maintain the website). As I could remember, the ability to control who
> > and what can be modified on certain pages was a plus to achieve more
> > acceptance of the Wiki inside the comunity, and this is not PhpWiki's
> > strength. Note that I'm not suggesting to lock down all pages for
> > edition, but IMO we should at least have this ability in hands if we
> > decide it's necessary to do so.
> I hoped that you would have more success with ACL's. I have reasonable
> good communication with the PhpWiki developers so I'm sure we could fix
> those issues, but I agree that we can't sell it to our users like this.

Actually, I was certainly looking for trouble because I tested a fresh CVS 
version. I had to manually fix two bugs, which BTW I forgot to report, but 
fortunately they were indentified in time for 1.3.9 (released today!):

- syntax errors in lib/plugin/WikiAdminRemove.php
- syntax error in schemas/mysql.sql

Doing a quick look on the Release Notes, I see that many bugs were fixed, 
possibly including those that made ACL not work for me. Also ACL and page 
permissions seem to be stabilized on 1.3.8. Will have a look this week, maybe 
I have more luck this time (and report the bugs I may find). We will probably 
stay with PhpWiki for anyway, to not lose the data 
already there.

> We should still upgrade the current Wiki installation to 1.3.8 though.
> The actual Wiki maintainers (James and Nicholas) seem MIA, so IMHO we
> should take it over.

Agreed, specially to fix that pagedump issue I mentioned on another thread. 
Let's wait for their response along this week, while I test the 1.3.9 locally 
to see if it works properly. No data will be lost BTW, as I always follow a 
procedure before doing upgrades, even for test stuff:

1) Announce the site is down for maintenance and disable it.
2) Do a database backup followed by a tarball of the current PHP code.
3) Re-enable the site and announce it's back.

> > 3. TWiki
> >
> > Conclusion: I think TWiki should be our first Wiki installation to be
> > publically tested on It has all features we
> > may need, specially full ACL support (which I've not tested yet; see
> > for a nice guide).
> I agree. How is performance?

I only tested it locally so I couldn't measure its performance properly. But I 
found and very fast to render. I found the built-in 
search engine specially fast also.

> It doesn't matter for us if installation is 
> a bit more difficult. We should take care of upgrading though,
> especially if we modify our installation a lot. Ideally, we'd make
> patches or plugins.

I agree, this is the most easy way, make patches of what we change (like we 
have for swish-e). Plugins for specific tasks (like fetch CVS log data) are 
also possible.

> I'd like some other text formatting rules. 

Possible by editing lib/TWiki/Plugins/ and adding our own 
rules. Not sure if we can do a complete set of PhpWiki-based formatting rules 

BTW: all the three Wikis I tested had almost completely different formatting 
rules. Is there a RFC or something like that to standardize Wiki's formatting 

> I say we proceed with testing TWiki. If it's good enough for
> freedesktop, it should be good enough for us!

It's what I hope!

> I assume you take care of installation ;-) Good luck,

Sure, along this week :)

Anderson Lizardo
lizardo at

More information about the website mailing list