[Coco] the future of the NitrOS-9 wiki
gheskett at wdtv.com
Sat May 7 10:18:17 EDT 2016
On Saturday 07 May 2016 06:31:01 Tormod Volden wrote:
> -- because better documentation is the only way to save NitrOS-9 and
> the OS-9 legacy from dying out --
> MediaWiki vs Markdown (Allura)
> The NitrOS-9 wiki was originally written in a MediaWiki format (same
> as used on wikipedia.org), and this was a built-in (as "hosted app")
> wiki engine at SourceForge until June 2014. At this point SourceForge
> moved the built-in wiki infrastructure to their Allura platform, which
> uses a Markdown format (also very popular these days). In the process
> they converted all project wikis to the new format, with various luck.
> Many may have noticed that the current NitrOS-9 wiki lacks some images
> and some tables look odd.
> Prior to this, they were documenting how to port a project wiki from
> the built-in wiki engine to a MediaWiki engine that the project can
> run on its own (SourceForge provides mysql data base instances and
> everything needed). Meanwhile this documentation seems to have
> disappeared, but I found it  through the Internet Archive. They
> also kept backups of the old MediaWiki content.
> This week I finally got to try out this MediaWiki setup and recovered
> the old NitrOS-9 wiki from the backups. The result can be seen at
> Note that it misses a few changes that have been done last year on the
> official, converted wiki at https://sourceforge.net/p/nitros9/wiki/
> (Also, the logo was just something I quickly sketched together. Is
> there a proper NitrOS-9 logo?)
The red, enlarged text I saw on one page but not the other, seems like a
good default, but I might size it up another 25-50 percent & move it to
top center of each page. I don't recall if anyone ever created a
different one. Mark, at Cloud-9 for his printed materials and web site,
if you could use it of course, might contain something.
> So this gives us the following choice:
> 1. Continue using the official, converted wiki in Markdown format
> todo: we should fix up images and tables
> - Standard and supported at SourceForge
> - Uses normal SourceForge accounts
> - No administration needed
> 2. Use the rescued MediaWiki
> todo: we must incorporate last year's few fixes
> - Much more features, e.g. RecentChanges and other SpecialPages
> - Looks much better in my opinion
> - MediaWiki is well maintained as standard on wikipedia etc
I have a preference for the MediaWiki format, but its very slight. In any
event, a front page link to the ChangeLog, in either format, would be
nice. Note I am not refering to the pages ChangeLog, but to the Nitros9
> When it comes to speed and performance I am not sure, they are both a
> bit slow and it varies a lot, probably depending on cache and server
> load. I have not enabled caching on MediaWiki AFAIK.
Either seems adequate to me, I clicked on the link posted, clicked on the
pager to select the window firefox was running on, and it was loaded in
that approximately 1 second. Firefox was already running.
> The above advantages on each side seems pretty minor to me. It is more
> a question of what would contributors like to work with!
> Voicing your opinion in this thread does not automatically mean you
> are taking on responsibility :) Though of course your voice will carry
> more weight if you are already working on the wiki, or have good
> intentions to do so.
Which is good for me, my failing back has me pretty well incapacitated.
And I don't think well when I am in pain, or full of gabapentin for the
> Best regards,
> PS. Aaron, this might be a question for the DriveWire4 wiki as well. I
> can do the MediaWiki setup there also if you like.
Thanks Tormod, for all of your efforts in this.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
More information about the Coco