ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    I hope Wiki.js does not fail

    IT Discussion
    wiki.js fosss
    11
    61
    5.8k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • stacksofplatesS
      stacksofplates @scottalanmiller
      last edited by stacksofplates

      @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

      @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

      @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

      @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

      I love MkDocs

      https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
      https://www.mkdocs.org/

      A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

      Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

      scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • scottalanmillerS
        scottalanmiller @stacksofplates
        last edited by

        @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

        @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

        @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

        @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

        @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

        I love MkDocs

        https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
        https://www.mkdocs.org/

        A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

        Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

        True, but I wonder how easy that is for non-tech staff to use.

        stacksofplatesS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • stacksofplatesS
          stacksofplates @scottalanmiller
          last edited by

          @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

          @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

          @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

          @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

          @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

          @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

          I love MkDocs

          https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
          https://www.mkdocs.org/

          A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

          Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

          True, but I wonder how easy that is for non-tech staff to use.

          I'm sure if you're using it you wouldn't have many non-technical people updating it. But theoretically it shouldn't be too hard through the GitLab web ui.

          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller @stacksofplates
            last edited by

            @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

            @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

            @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

            @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

            I love MkDocs

            https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
            https://www.mkdocs.org/

            A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

            Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

            True, but I wonder how easy that is for non-tech staff to use.

            I'm sure if you're using it you wouldn't have many non-technical people updating it. But theoretically it shouldn't be too hard through the GitLab web ui.

            Not "too hard". But given that the theory behind a wiki is the insane ease of editing, it kind of defeats that. The background concept states that links are supposed to automatically make new pages. Editing should be in place. Trying to get normal end users to start going to GitHub feels cumbersome even just to explain.

            Easy enough for techs to do, but seems better suited to something edited occasionally rather than constantly.

            stacksofplatesS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • stacksofplatesS
              stacksofplates @scottalanmiller
              last edited by

              @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

              @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

              @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

              @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

              @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

              @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

              @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

              @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

              I love MkDocs

              https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
              https://www.mkdocs.org/

              A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

              Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

              True, but I wonder how easy that is for non-tech staff to use.

              I'm sure if you're using it you wouldn't have many non-technical people updating it. But theoretically it shouldn't be too hard through the GitLab web ui.

              Not "too hard". But given that the theory behind a wiki is the insane ease of editing, it kind of defeats that. The background concept states that links are supposed to automatically make new pages. Editing should be in place. Trying to get normal end users to start going to GitHub feels cumbersome even just to explain.

              Easy enough for techs to do, but seems better suited to something edited occasionally rather than constantly.

              That's why I said if you're using it it's prob mostly technical people. We use Asciidoctor in a pipeline and it works really well. As soon as a commit is made Jenkins runs the pipeline to build the new site with Gradle. It builds an HTML version and a PDF version. So it's really easy for people that understand that workflow and then it's automatically versioned.

              scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stacksofplatesS
                stacksofplates
                last edited by

                Coincidentally this is also how my site is built. It's a static site built with Hugo on GitLab pages. Once a commit is made the CI/CD process starts on my GitLab runner and builds my site for me.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller @stacksofplates
                  last edited by

                  @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                  @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

                  I love MkDocs

                  https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
                  https://www.mkdocs.org/

                  A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

                  Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

                  True, but I wonder how easy that is for non-tech staff to use.

                  I'm sure if you're using it you wouldn't have many non-technical people updating it. But theoretically it shouldn't be too hard through the GitLab web ui.

                  Not "too hard". But given that the theory behind a wiki is the insane ease of editing, it kind of defeats that. The background concept states that links are supposed to automatically make new pages. Editing should be in place. Trying to get normal end users to start going to GitHub feels cumbersome even just to explain.

                  Easy enough for techs to do, but seems better suited to something edited occasionally rather than constantly.

                  That's why I said if you're using it it's prob mostly technical people. We use Asciidoctor in a pipeline and it works really well. As soon as a commit is made Jenkins runs the pipeline to build the new site with Gradle. It builds an HTML version and a PDF version. So it's really easy for people that understand that workflow and then it's automatically versioned.

                  Oh, if using a static generator. I get it. I thought you meant using a wiki. Makes sense.

                  stacksofplatesS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • stacksofplatesS
                    stacksofplates @scottalanmiller
                    last edited by

                    @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                    @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

                    I love MkDocs

                    https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
                    https://www.mkdocs.org/

                    A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

                    Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

                    True, but I wonder how easy that is for non-tech staff to use.

                    I'm sure if you're using it you wouldn't have many non-technical people updating it. But theoretically it shouldn't be too hard through the GitLab web ui.

                    Not "too hard". But given that the theory behind a wiki is the insane ease of editing, it kind of defeats that. The background concept states that links are supposed to automatically make new pages. Editing should be in place. Trying to get normal end users to start going to GitHub feels cumbersome even just to explain.

                    Easy enough for techs to do, but seems better suited to something edited occasionally rather than constantly.

                    That's why I said if you're using it it's prob mostly technical people. We use Asciidoctor in a pipeline and it works really well. As soon as a commit is made Jenkins runs the pipeline to build the new site with Gradle. It builds an HTML version and a PDF version. So it's really easy for people that understand that workflow and then it's automatically versioned.

                    Oh, if using a static generator. I get it. I thought you meant using a wiki. Makes sense.

                    Yeah it's a static documentation site. I guess you could say it's somewhat like a wiki, but it's not really. I don't like having to open a web interface, log in, click edit, blah blah when I can just edit it in a few seconds in vim and hit ctrl+g to commit.

                    jmooreJ scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • jmooreJ
                      jmoore @stacksofplates
                      last edited by

                      @stacksofplates I love that flow of things. Where can I learn more about this and how it works?

                      stacksofplatesS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • stacksofplatesS
                        stacksofplates @jmoore
                        last edited by

                        @jmoore said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                        @stacksofplates I love that flow of things. Where can I learn more about this and how it works?

                        I'll do a write up if I get a chance tonight. It's pretty simple to set up.

                        jmooreJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                        • jmooreJ
                          jmoore @stacksofplates
                          last edited by

                          @stacksofplates Cool, thanks very much

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • scottalanmillerS
                            scottalanmiller @stacksofplates
                            last edited by

                            @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @stacksofplates said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @Emad-R said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @scottalanmiller said in I hope Wiki.js does not fail:

                            @wrx7m both wiki.js and BookStack are nice. And in reality, DokuWiki isn't bad either. We use all three, in different situations.

                            I love MkDocs

                            https://docs.drush.org/en/master/cron/
                            https://www.mkdocs.org/

                            A static generator? How do you handle constant updates from lots of users?

                            Pipelines in a CI/CD process. Treat it as code just like anything else

                            True, but I wonder how easy that is for non-tech staff to use.

                            I'm sure if you're using it you wouldn't have many non-technical people updating it. But theoretically it shouldn't be too hard through the GitLab web ui.

                            Not "too hard". But given that the theory behind a wiki is the insane ease of editing, it kind of defeats that. The background concept states that links are supposed to automatically make new pages. Editing should be in place. Trying to get normal end users to start going to GitHub feels cumbersome even just to explain.

                            Easy enough for techs to do, but seems better suited to something edited occasionally rather than constantly.

                            That's why I said if you're using it it's prob mostly technical people. We use Asciidoctor in a pipeline and it works really well. As soon as a commit is made Jenkins runs the pipeline to build the new site with Gradle. It builds an HTML version and a PDF version. So it's really easy for people that understand that workflow and then it's automatically versioned.

                            Oh, if using a static generator. I get it. I thought you meant using a wiki. Makes sense.

                            Yeah it's a static documentation site. I guess you could say it's somewhat like a wiki, but it's not really. I don't like having to open a web interface, log in, click edit, blah blah when I can just edit it in a few seconds in vim and hit ctrl+g to commit.

                            That makes more sense.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • stacksofplatesS
                              stacksofplates
                              last edited by

                              Here's the write-up. https://mangolassi.it/topic/18994/static-site-in-a-ci-cd-pipeline

                              It's somewhat brief, but a lot of this is kind of self explanatory.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                              • 1
                              • 2
                              • 3
                              • 4
                              • 4 / 4
                              • First post
                                Last post