On 2/23/12 6:38 PM, Julian Djamil Fagir wrote:
Hi,
thank you all for your replies. Though, I'm still torn between the different
solutions and which aspects measure worth.
* mediawiki is the most stable solution. Though I personally don't like its
syntax, it's well-known throughout the world. With the final switch, we'd
have to transform the user content and database, and users have to switch
to the new syntax, too.
Stable in what sense?Who will perform this "final switch"? When will it happen? How much content will tentatively be involved? How much content will end up being *duplicated*?
And... why force users to go through the learning curve of two wiki systems with two different syntaxes?
* ikiwiki is the wiki that should finally be used on netbsd.org. My matter
with ikiwiki is only that I absolutely don't know it and cannot write
perl, and would thus rather take another wiki.
That's a huge red flag. Proposing an alternative because you "don't know" (and you are clearly admitting that) is hard to justify and hard to take seriously. Most likely, you will end up repeating mistakes that have already been solved in the ikiwiki setup and/or realize later on that ikiwiki was not "that bad" when it's too late.
Amitai has reiterated that getting wiki.netbsd.org ready for prime time wouldn't involve so much effort. Why not *at least* investigate this idea instead of running away? (I sincerely don't know either, but I'm telling you that migrating data as you propose from this temporary wiki to the final one will NOT be as easy as you think, and may as well take way more time than finishing the necessary work on wiki.netbsd.org.)