discuss: Thread: Why MoinMoin?

Why was MoinMoin chosen for the tldp wiki?  Hasn't Mediawiki
essentially become the wiki software leader?  Also, I know that the
Wikimedia Foundation has a usability project underway to make wiki
editing of mediawiki pages much more user friendly, which I would
think would benefit a project like tldp greatly.

Also, I've had the unfortunate luck to have to convert MoinMoin wikis
to Mediawiki in the past and it gets harder as the number of articles
grows.

Thanks
Bill

s/MediaWiki/SomeOtherRandomWikiImplementation/g

I'm usually fairly quiet but doesn't TLDP have more to do than quibble 
over a wiki implementation (or is it just me)?

DSL

Bill Traynor wrote:
> Why was MoinMoin chosen for the tldp wiki?  Hasn't Mediawiki
> essentially become the wiki software leader?  Also, I know that the
> Wikimedia Foundation has a usability project underway to make wiki
> editing of mediawiki pages much more user friendly, which I would
> think would benefit a project like tldp greatly.
>
> Also, I've had the unfortunate luck to have to convert MoinMoin wikis
> to Mediawiki in the past and it gets harder as the number of articles
> grows.
>
> Thanks
> Bill
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
>
>   

Quoting Bill Traynor ####@####.####

> Why was MoinMoin chosen for the tldp wiki?  Hasn't Mediawiki
> essentially become the wiki software leader?  

1.  Not sure (but I can guess).
2.  No.  (Although I also note without particular objection that 
    you're expressing an opinion much more than you're actually 
    asking a question.)

More below.

> Also, I know that the Wikimedia Foundation has a usability project
> underway to make wiki editing of mediawiki pages much more user
> friendly, which I would think would benefit a project like tldp
> greatly.

And yet, Mediawiki markup is (in my experience) really neither more nor
less "user friendly" than pretty much any other of the usual wiki markup
styles, e.g., TWiki.

I would speculate that probably our kind and honoured hosts at iBiblio 
selected the software.  They might have done so with an eye to lesser
hassle for themselves while wearing their sysadmin hats -- if only on
account of these points of comparison:

                        MediaWiki                   MoinMoin
Dependencies            PHP5 w/PCRE & std. PHPlib   Python, nothing else
(other than an httpd)   MySQL 4 or Postgres 8.1+
                        Perl5

Backup Method           MediaWiki                   MoinMoin
                        Database dump, then         Regular file backup
                        off-copy the dump files

But, really, the winning consideration is that they were willing to 
do the setup and subsequent admin work, and they did (and are doing)
that work.  The fact that you have a differing opinion really doesn't
signify, because you've not offered to set up and administer an
alternative (nor are in a position to do so, as you're not an iBiblio
admin).

You act as if the matter were up for debate.  But you're way, way late
for that, I'm afraid.

Does this mean that TLDP is essentially migrating away from traditional
1980's style HTML flat files and advancing to mid-90's wiki tech? 

It's good to see this project is still alive. Although, the thought of it
turning into a wiki (please tell me I'm misreading these emails), brings the
TLDP down to the spectrum of HOWTOForge, essentially. 

I guess with attitudes like this (below), though, it explains the
degradation.

--------- Original Message --------
From: Rick Moen ####@####.####
To: ####@####.#### ####@####.####
Subject: Re: [discuss] Why MoinMoin?
Date: 20/05/09 00:32

> Quoting Bill Traynor ####@####.####
> 
> > Why was MoinMoin chosen for the tldp wiki?  Hasn't Mediawiki
> > essentially become the wiki software leader?  
> 
> 1.  Not sure (but I can guess).
> 2.  No.  (Although I also note without particular objection that 
>     you're expressing an opinion much more than you're actually 
>     asking a question.)
> 
> More below.
> 
> > Also, I know that the Wikimedia Foundation has a usability project
> > underway to make wiki editing of mediawiki pages much more user
> > friendly, which I would think would benefit a project like tldp
> > greatly.
> 
> And yet, Mediawiki markup is (in my experience) really neither more nor
> less "user friendly" than pretty much any other of the usual
wiki markup
> styles, e.g., TWiki.
> 
> I would speculate that probably our kind and honoured hosts at iBiblio 
> selected the software.  They might have done so with an eye to lesser
> hassle for themselves while wearing their sysadmin hats -- if only on
> account of these points of comparison:
> 
>                         MediaWiki                   MoinMoin
> Dependencies            PHP5 w/PCRE & std. PHPlib   Python, nothing
else
> (other than an httpd)   MySQL 4 or Postgres 8.1+
>                         Perl5
> 
> Backup Method           MediaWiki                   MoinMoin
>                         Database dump, then         Regular file backup
>                         off-copy the dump files
> 
> But, really, the winning consideration is that they were willing to 
> do the setup and subsequent admin work, and they did (and are doing)
> that work.  The fact that you have a differing opinion really doesn't
> signify, because you've not offered to set up and administer an
> alternative (nor are in a position to do so, as you're not an iBiblio
> admin).
> 
> You act as if the matter were up for debate.  But you're way, way late
> for that, I'm afraid.
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
> 
> 

________________________________________________
Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.9

Quoting Sean ####@####.####

> Does this mean that TLDP is essentially migrating away from traditional
> 1980's style HTML flat files and advancing to mid-90's wiki tech? 

Your question is not actually answerable as phrased, because its premise
is factually incorrect.

DocBook and LinuxDoc are true structured markup.  LDP had _those_ as its
standard master format for many years.  Although contributions in
"1980s-style HTML flat files" were (and are) accepted, along with pretty
much anything else usable, that was never LDP's format.  (Staff would
re-markup the contribution.)

> It's good to see this project is still alive. Although, the thought of it
> turning into a wiki (please tell me I'm misreading these emails), brings the
> TLDP down to the spectrum of HOWTOForge, essentially. 

It's a shame you didn't remember the lessons of our somewhat extensive
discussion of HowtoForge in July 2008.  To review:  

1.  HowtoForge appears to be a commercial effort of Mr. Till Brehm,
principal of projektfarm GmbH in Germany.  (Mind you, nothing wrong with
commerce.)

2.  Its contents are proprietary, advertising-driven, and exist
entirely dependent on the continued well-being of a one-man-band
for-profit company.

Accordingly, its contents also cannot even be lawfully mirrored, let
alone packaged for use by Linux distributions (absent special permission
from the documents' individual authors, for that purpose).

We covered that, at the time.  You were here.


> I guess with attitudes like this (below), though, it explains the
> degradation.

Passive-aggressive much?  If you find something wrong with my reasoning,
you are extremely welcome to say what's wrong.  Taking vague shots at my
"attitude" seems pretty useless, especially when I've merely explained
why iBiblio is unlikely to rip out MoinMoin and replace it with
MediaWiki for no better reason than Bill Traynor preferring the latter.

I frankly suspect you saw absolutely nothing wrong in my reasoning, but
were just looking for an opportunity to pick a fight.  Again.

Sorry, I'm a bit busy.

-- 
Cheers,                      Notice:  The value of your Hofstadter's Constant 
Rick Moen                    (the average amount of time you spend each month 
####@####.####          thinking about Hofstadter's Constant) has just 
McQ!  (4x80)                 been adjusted upwards.

Bill Traynor:
[snip]
>Why was MoinMoin chosen for the tldp wiki?  Hasn't Mediawiki
>essentially become the wiki software leader?  Also, I know that the
>Wikimedia Foundation has a usability project underway to make wiki
>editing of mediawiki pages much more user friendly, which I would
>think would benefit a project like tldp greatly.
[snip]

MoinMoin was a workable solution, and seems to be a good one, at least
as good as a choice of MediaWiki.   You're  _really_ begging the
question.

I also thought it was a little sneaky to ask us "Why LDP's still using
MoinMoin" as if it was implied, understood, or well-accepted that
Mediawiki was somehow superior.     "Windows  is more popular, so LDP
should make sure to run Windows Vista + Apache,  or  Server 2008 and
IIS on all the web servers...".


I'm not convinced that Mediawiki is the "wiki software leader", or
that being the leader means that their software best meets the
requirements of the LDP.   Please explain why you think this would be.

I'm also not convinced MoinMoin was a poor choice that the LDP ought
to revisit or that there's any compelling reason for changing to
Mediawiki...

A usability project is a good thing,  but until the project is
completed, and its results are stable,  well-documented, and
well-understood,  it doesn't mean much.

Would you switch your mail server from Postfix to Exchange,  because
MS announced some uber cool feature X  coming in some future major
release of the product?

In my view speculation of future enhancements an alternate software
program might make is no reason to immediately switch to that software
program.

Sean:
[snip]
>> Does this mean that TLDP is essentially migrating away from traditional
>> 1980's style HTML flat files and advancing to mid-90's wiki tech?
[snip]

There is nothing inherently wrong with HTML flat files, although they
are a lot harder for authors to maintain than structured files.

By the way, structured flat files pre-dated the 80s.
LaTeX and friends are frequently used also, and great technologies.

The decade in which a technology first became popular is irrelevent;
if it can help you, and does it the most convenient, least-cumbersome
way,  and meets all your documentation needs (like maintainability and
maybe interoperability), then do it.


-- 
-Mysid

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Rick Moen ####@####.#### wrote:
> Quoting Bill Traynor ####@####.####
>
>> Why was MoinMoin chosen for the tldp wiki?  Hasn't Mediawiki
>> essentially become the wiki software leader?
>
> 1.  Not sure (but I can guess).
> 2.  No.  (Although I also note without particular objection that
>    you're expressing an opinion much more than you're actually
>    asking a question.)
>
> More below.
>
>> Also, I know that the Wikimedia Foundation has a usability project
>> underway to make wiki editing of mediawiki pages much more user
>> friendly, which I would think would benefit a project like tldp
>> greatly.
>
> And yet, Mediawiki markup is (in my experience) really neither more nor
> less "user friendly" than pretty much any other of the usual wiki markup
> styles, e.g., TWiki.

I agree with your wiki markup point.  I just thought something as
described in this press release:

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Wikipedia_to_become_more_user-friendly_for_new_volunteer_writers

may benefit TLDP as well.

>
> I would speculate that probably our kind and honoured hosts at iBiblio
> selected the software.  They might have done so with an eye to lesser
> hassle for themselves while wearing their sysadmin hats -- if only on
> account of these points of comparison:
>
>                        MediaWiki                   MoinMoin
> Dependencies            PHP5 w/PCRE & std. PHPlib   Python, nothing else
> (other than an httpd)   MySQL 4 or Postgres 8.1+
>                        Perl5
>
> Backup Method           MediaWiki                   MoinMoin
>                        Database dump, then         Regular file backup
>                        off-copy the dump files
>

That makes sense.

> But, really, the winning consideration is that they were willing to
> do the setup and subsequent admin work, and they did (and are doing)
> that work.  The fact that you have a differing opinion really doesn't
> signify, because you've not offered to set up and administer an
> alternative (nor are in a position to do so, as you're not an iBiblio
> admin).

I was just curious, and perhaps phrased my question poorly.  Also,
I've been a list subscriber for 1 day now, and do not know the
history.

>
> You act as if the matter were up for debate.  But you're way, way late
> for that, I'm afraid.
>
>
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
>
>

Quoting Bill Traynor ####@####.####

> I was just curious, and perhaps phrased my question poorly.  Also,
> I've been a list subscriber for 1 day now, and do not know the
> history.

Not a problem.  Sorry if I came across as irritable, which was not my
intention.

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:54 PM, James Hess ####@####.#### wrote:
> Bill Traynor:
> [snip]
>>Why was MoinMoin chosen for the tldp wiki?  Hasn't Mediawiki
>>essentially become the wiki software leader?  Also, I know that the
>>Wikimedia Foundation has a usability project underway to make wiki
>>editing of mediawiki pages much more user friendly, which I would
>>think would benefit a project like tldp greatly.
> [snip]
>
> MoinMoin was a workable solution, and seems to be a good one, at least
> as good as a choice of MediaWiki.   You're  _really_ begging the
> question.

Huh? I asked once.

>
> I also thought it was a little sneaky to ask us "Why LDP's still using
> MoinMoin" as if it was implied, understood, or well-accepted that
> Mediawiki was somehow superior.     "Windows  is more popular, so LDP
> should make sure to run Windows Vista + Apache,  or  Server 2008 and
> IIS on all the web servers...".

Sneaky?  I didn't ask "Why LDP's still using MoinMoin".  I was simply
curious why it was chosen, which was answered already.

>
>
> I'm not convinced that Mediawiki is the "wiki software leader", or
> that being the leader means that their software best meets the
> requirements of the LDP.   Please explain why you think this would be.
>
> I'm also not convinced MoinMoin was a poor choice that the LDP ought
> to revisit or that there's any compelling reason for changing to
> Mediawiki...
>
> A usability project is a good thing,  but until the project is
> completed, and its results are stable,  well-documented, and
> well-understood,  it doesn't mean much.
>
> Would you switch your mail server from Postfix to Exchange,  because
> MS announced some uber cool feature X  coming in some future major
> release of the product?
>
> In my view speculation of future enhancements an alternate software
> program might make is no reason to immediately switch to that software
> program.
>
> Sean:
> [snip]
>>> Does this mean that TLDP is essentially migrating away from traditional
>>> 1980's style HTML flat files and advancing to mid-90's wiki tech?
> [snip]
>
> There is nothing inherently wrong with HTML flat files, although they
> are a lot harder for authors to maintain than structured files.
>
> By the way, structured flat files pre-dated the 80s.
> LaTeX and friends are frequently used also, and great technologies.
>
> The decade in which a technology first became popular is irrelevent;
> if it can help you, and does it the most convenient, least-cumbersome
> way,  and meets all your documentation needs (like maintainability and
> maybe interoperability), then do it.
>
>
> --
> -Mysid
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
>
>

> Sneaky?  I didn't ask "Why LDP's still using MoinMoin".  I was simply
> curious why it was chosen, which was answered already.

No, this is what raises the red flag:
"Hasn't Mediawiki essentially become the wiki software leader?"

It's not just asking for the reason for a decision, but implicitly
raising doubt about its validity, while presenting an alternative.
It essentially creates confusion about the meaning of your own
message.


By sneaky I mean it's a rhetorical form that appears in substance to
serve as attempt to create fear and uncertainty about the basis for a
past decision  based on anticipated future developments.

--
-J