Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wiki.js

wiki.js.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 213 posts

Re: Wiki.js

#11

Post by Hamcha »

docs.requarks.io, which is said to be using Wiki.js, straight up doesn't load without Javascript, and even with Javascript enabled it's a multi-page application that just feels slower browsing page to page than your average 10-year-old mediawiki install (probably also heavier on the backend).

Who exactly is asking for slower software?

Re: Wiki.js

#12

Post by edaemon »

bauerd wrote: post #9
w-ll wrote: post #6

I'd atleast expect a demo, and the homepage to be running on said wiki.

There's a link to a demo in their README: https://docs.requarks.io/demo

Their demo link there didn't work when I tried it, it's looking for the non-existent master branch. The docs site itself (https://docs.requarks.io/) is running on Wiki.js, though.

Re: Wiki.js

#13

Post by eitland »

load wrote: post #3

If it doesn't run on MediaWiki, I'm not into it.

DokuWiki used to be very much better for my use cases: easier to hack on/make plugins for and more built in functionality and less dependencies on top if that since it store the pages as flat files instead of using a DB.

Re: Wiki.js

#14

Post by eitland »

load wrote: post #8
wutwutwutwut wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

I mean, I appreciate the effort put into building this, but external tools like AWB, and userscripts/gadgets (plus a host of other goodies) can't be accessed over globally if it's on a completely different software. Almost every wiki on the net uses MediaWiki for good reason. I will be happy if this Wiki.js platform does have compatibility with these features, though.

> Almost every wiki on the net uses MediaWiki for good reason.

It is unclear to ne if you refer to statistics or gut feeling here. Would you mind clarifying?

Re: Wiki.js

#15

Post by wutwutwutwut »

load wrote: post #8
wutwutwutwut wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

I mean, I appreciate the effort put into building this, but external tools like AWB, and userscripts/gadgets (plus a host of other goodies) can't be accessed over globally if it's on a completely different software. Almost every wiki on the net uses MediaWiki for good reason. I will be happy if this Wiki.js platform does have compatibility with these features, though.

I guess the same reasoning would apply to WordPress, PHP and MySQL then (user scripts, penetration etc). Would that be your first choice when setting up a new web page?

Re: Wiki.js

#16

Post by jadia »

I started using Wiki.js over a year ago to maintain documentation related to system admin duties.

We run this in a docker container with SQLite database and backup the database daily to another server.

The private and public pages feature fits perfectly to our use case. We show system information, how-to guides and rules on the public pages and manage sysadmin documentation with restricted access.

Re: Wiki.js

#17

Post by schoolornot »

This is exciting. A compelling FOSS alternative to Atlassian Confluence was sorely needed.

Mediawiki has some UX and RBAC challenges that makes it difficult to scale to large organizations.

Re: Wiki.js

#18

Post by mainframed »

Hamcha wrote: post #11

docs.requarks.io, which is said to be using Wiki.js, straight up doesn't load without Javascript, and even with Javascript enabled it's a multi-page application that just feels slower browsing page to page than your average 10-year-old mediawiki install (probably also heavier on the backend). Who exactly is asking for slower software?

Was excited about seeing an open alternative to Gitbook.

But yes, not loading without Javascript is a showstopper.

Re: Wiki.js

#19

Post by iamacyborg »

eitland wrote: post #14
load wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I appreciate the effort put into building this, but external tools like AWB, and userscripts/gadgets (plus a host of other goodies) can't be accessed over globally if it's on a completely different software. Almost every wiki on the net uses MediaWiki for good reason. I will be happy if this Wiki.js platform does have compatibility with these features, though.

> Almost every wiki on the net uses MediaWiki for good reason. It is unclear to ne if you refer to statistics or gut feeling here. Would you mind clarifying?

Stats, clearly.
Post reply on HN