Rick DeNatale wrote:
> On 10/23/06, Alder Green <alder.green / gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks everyone for the information.
>>
>> My conclusion is that currently there is no compelling Ruby Wiki
>> solution.
>>
>> Instiki has too few active developers (only one, apparently?). Pimki
>> is similarly afflicted.
>>
>> Though I greatly prefer Ruby as a technology, I can't commit to a
>> system that has such a tiny developer - and accordingly also user -
>> communities.
>>
>> It's a shame that there is no attractive Ruby Wiki. I guess the reason
>> is that PHP already had several mature, advanced Wikis (as well as
>> CMSes, BBs..), with large communities of active developers, when Ruby
>> started to become popular.
>>
>> My next step is to investigate non-Ruby Wikis, with Dokuwiki being the
>> first, as it was recommended by James and seems to fit my (rather
>> humble :-) requirements.
> 
> You might have a look at mediawiki.  It's quite full-functioned (it's
> what runs wikipedia).  For PHP code it's also quite well structured.
> 
> The one thing which some find lacking in mediawiki is a sophisticated
> permissions system.  But folks looking for that should probably be
> looking at a CMS rather than a wiki.  You can set up mediawiki to
> require registration before editing, and there are a few roles for
> administration vs. contributors.
> 
Hieraki?