[TW5] A quick question to gauge interest

[Jed Carty]

I am going to change the name of the multiuser plugin because it outgrew that name a few months ago and it is probably leading to more confusion about what the plugin does than anything else.

While I am doing this I am trying to decide if I should split it up into separate plugins or not. This is probably going to be a more involved process than I had hoped, and since tiddlywiki doesn't have a robust plugin dependency system in place it may be a bit of an annoyance to use because of how the  plugins would depend on each other.

So instead of just pushing forward and doing a lot of work splitting up the plugin I am going to ask:

Does anyone who would use the plugin not want the full functionality?

At the moment it can:

- Serve multiple wikis

- Have two-way (almost) immediate updates when a tiddler is edited either in a browser or on the server

- Support multiple people editing the same wiki at the same time

- Convert an html wiki into a new node-based wiki and export a node based wiki as an html wiki (this function is a bit rough still, but eventually it should let you go mostly seemlessly from a single file to node and back)

It does most of this using websockets so there is a server command that uses the web socket adaptor and an external server command that lets you use an external server (like an expressjs server) which makes authentication and access controls much simpler. (I am going to have a publicly accessible demo of the multi-user wiki setup sometime soon, shh! it's a secret.)

[HansWobbe]

Jed:

Personally, I am very happy with the full functionality of this excellent plugin.  I do not use all of its capabilities yet, but the overhead doe not seem significant to me, so I prefer to know its all there for the next time I want to expand my uses.

Thank you very much for the tiem and effort you've put into this too !!

Best regards,
Hans!

 

[Mat]

@Jed, 

1) You don't state what a split up would result in.
2) If there is a split up into separately parts that could be independently (and meaningfully) used AND that don't rely on the same infrastructure, then such a split up would make sense. For example, if some of the functionality depends on a connected network but other functionality does not, then that seems like a desirable split up. (E.g that last feature doesn't seem to have anything directly to do with multiuserability.)

<:-)

[Jed Carty]

Not much about the plugin now is about multiuserability, that is why I am changing the name. It can be used by multiple people but my main use for it is to have the wikis open on multiple computers and not have to worry about losing my edits. The name seems to make people assume that it is only worthwhile if you have multiple people using the wiki.

There were a few comments from different threads like 'if you split out the web socket part of this I would use it', but no one said more than that. So I could make a web socket plugin but I don't have anything other than this that it would be used for.

Converting the wikis between single file and node versions fits with everything else the plugin does, which is make the wikis more portable, either in the sense of putting everything on a usb stick and carrying it around or in the sense of being able to edit the wikis from any browser you want or converting between single file and node versions as needed.

[Mark S.]

Just curious. Why did someone want to split out the web socket part?

-- Mark

[Jed Carty]

I don't know, I don't remember which thread it was in but someone mentioned being interested if I split it out.

I may have been to make a git plugin.

[Mat]

On Saturday, April 28, 2018 at 9:04:39 PM UTC+2, Jed Carty wrote:

Not much about the plugin now is about multiuserability, that is why I am changing the name. It can be used by multiple people but my main use for it is to have the wikis open on multiple computers and not have to worry about losing my edits. The name seems to make people assume that it is only worthwhile if you have multiple people using the wiki.

Aha... I just realized am one of those presumptuous ones! Maybe it could be called a "Multi-computer TiddlyWiki" leaving the interpretation of the name to the user who is likely colored by what he needs!

Converting the wikis between single file and node versions fits with everything else the plugin does, which is make the wikis more portable, either in the sense of putting everything on a usb stick and carrying it around or in the sense of being able to edit the wikis from any browser you want or converting between single file and node versions as needed.

Now that functionality does sound like a valuable stand-alone plugin though! It would probably lower the threshold to try out the node version because you could convert your regular (single file) TW as you try out node and if you're not happy then you can switch back but without loosing work you've done while in node. To name just one example.

<:-)

[Mark S.]

On Saturday, April 28, 2018 at 1:32:35 PM UTC-7, Mat wrote:

Aha... I just realized am one of those presumptuous ones! Maybe it could be called a "Multi-computer TiddlyWiki" leaving the interpretation of the name to the user who is likely colored by what he needs!

Or go for the gusto -- "Universal TiddlyWiki"

-- Mark

[Jed Carty]

I am probably going to go with a name that isn't descriptive to just avoid the problem. I am leaning toward TiddlyFoule because it is seems like it could be descriptive without actually telling you anything about what it does.

And the question about splitting it up is probably most meaningful in terms of if there is some reason to not have all the functionality available. Like Hans said, there is no reason to use all of it if you don't need it. Would it be better to just have the conversion between single file and html wikis and not immediately save your changes for some reason?

[TonyM]

Jed,

Perhaps calling it multi-access tiddlywiki would address both multi-session and multi-user. I have not yet driven a multi-user version out to multiple users at once but I do believe this is a major advance of your solution and something TiddlyWiki is crying out for. It will take time for people to host it perhaps on "server" devices, within docker or on some internet platforms (I plan to make my mac-mini or synology disk-station host it) but I expect in time a lot of people will be looking for multi-user tiddlywiki as well. Historically many have asked for such features.  The key use you point out, multi-session (browsers) is also revolutionary but also the fastest to use "use case".

I am still trying to get the multi-wiki through your solution working smoothly, develop a work flow for it, then I plan to migrate more than half a dozen wikis into it.

Multi-access, even if is is a tag line you use should encourage both multi-session and multi-user curious people to it.

 

On dividing it into plugins, perhaps you should plan to separate out the websockets in the long run as it seems to be offering an infrastructure solution for other developer solutions like messaging and inter-wiki communications. This does not mean you need to maintain or publish the websockets component separately from your solution, only keep it up your sleeve for other developers or yourself to reuse. In effect I am suggesting there is value in providing a web-sockets solution separately but no need to divide your multi-access solution into components, perhaps only in the distant future when multiple solutions depend on websockets.

Thanks for this work and the single file install, they are revolutionary, and revolutions take time to play out.

Regards

Tony

[Mat]

TiddlyFoule because it is seems like it could be descriptive without actually telling you anything about what it does.

What does "foule" mean? I can't find it in the dictionaries. But I do know what "foul" means and that would be an odd choice. (Sorry if I'm missing some irony or joke?)

Tonys "Multi-access" suggestion is good IMO.

 

Would it be better to just have the conversion between single file and html wikis and not immediately save your changes for some reason?

(Assuming you mean conversion between "single file and multi file".) Sure, if that is possible without having to immediately save it then that is even better! 

<:-)

[Jed Carty]

It is the french word for mob or crowd in the sense of a group of people.

[BurningTreeC]

Hi Jed,

I got a name idea:

 iTW©

[TonyM]

Jed,

Foul bird or chicken or often used with the word smell. The drains smell foul.

Dont use tiddlyfoule is my firm advice, something about it is very smelly.

;-)

[Ste Wilson]

Or.. To recycle a joke from Grand Theft Auto... iTW-@T

[PMario]

On Sunday, April 29, 2018 at 10:34:47 AM UTC+2, Mat wrote:

TiddlyFoule because it is seems like it could be descriptive without actually telling you anything about what it does.

What does "foule" mean? I can't find it in the dictionaries. But I do know what "foul" means and that would be an odd choice. (Sorry if I'm missing some irony or joke?)

Hi Jed,

IMO that would be a bad choice. For German speaking users the first impression would be english: "foul" or german:"faul" or even "verfault" which means rotten.

Both wouldn't make much sense at all.

-m

[Jed Carty]

Maybe I will just go with english and call it TiddlyMob. I am feeling very against descriptive names at the moment.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Jed

Regarding possible modularisation via plugins.

Well, it works well as is. The performance is good.

But there is one thing that is brilliant about it that maybe could be done a different way? At the moment you include the great feature to select template TW to create new TW. At the moment the "libraries" for that are inside the executable. Right?

Could the structure for that be external to the executable so that end users could add their own without needing to compile them?

Maybe facility for that could be a plugin -- i.e. to extend function?

Best wishes
Josiah

[Jed Carty]

At the moment I am talking about the plugin, packaging everything into a single file is a different part. And it can be setup to point to editions somewhere else. That is just a configuration option.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Jed

On Sunday, 29 April 2018 13:51:10 UTC+2, Jed Carty wrote:

Maybe I will just go with english and call it TiddlyMob. I am feeling very against descriptive names at the moment.

IMO French is great for words that evoke aspects of creative endeavour with more than mechanical resonance. That hint at scope rather than at description. Its unfortunate that "foule" ("crowd" / "a variety of things") can't work in English because the look of it and sound of it. But many superb French words do work in English too.

I commented before that "Bricolage" & "Bricoleur" (roughly = "DIY" & "DIY-er", though in French it has much deeper resonances) are a very good fit for what TW is in general. In some cases "Glanant" & "Glaneur" (gleaner & gleaning) also applies.

In general, to avoid the issues of descriptive "blobs" in English, one can often use activity rather than statis -- so its not TW, its TW-ing. You get the idea?

I'll write separately about how I myself think about "Multi-user" et al.

Just thoughts
Josiah

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Jed Carty wrote:

At the moment I am talking about the plugin, packaging everything into a single file is a different part. And it can be setup to point to editions somewhere else. That is just a configuration option.

Ciao Jed

Thanks for that. FYI I truly have no grasp of what is under the hood or how the scope of a plugin is decided. But I think its better I say something than nothing. I don't mind being an idiot :-).

Josiah

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Quick note ...

I would not use "Mob" because of its strong association with smart-phone only use ... as in Flash-Mobs

Just a thought
Josiah

On Sunday, 29 April 2018 13:51:10 UTC+2, Jed Carty wrote:

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Jed Carty wrote:

I am going to change the name of the multiuser plugin because it outgrew that name a few months ago and it is probably leading to more confusion about what the plugin does than anything else.

Its a wonderful thing you made.

I'm using it. What do I find critically useful?

-- Proper Portability

-- Wrap-ability (meaning, I can install it, add TW that are portably addressed, re-wrap it in a zip and send it to another knowing it will work exactly the same. I have done that & it worked.)

-- Honed scripting??? Though I don't understand how you do it its apparent to me that you are using some internal scripting that normally you'd type that a console? IF so that opens many doors for end-users who don't want to know about node commands.

-- Reliability. Its been dead stable.

-- Networkable. (I'm assuming this is the central bit of what was called "multi-user"). It works. I have it available in the kitchen on a tablet and in the computer room on a desktop. It works.

If you ask me to say what overall I think its features are ... Portable, Networkable TW.

Best wishes
Josiah

[Jed Carty]

Ok, the new name may just be Bob.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Lol. I think "Bob" might work :-).

[Birthe C]

You made it sound so great. Maybe you could explain to me in simple words, please, what I need to use it and how?

Birthe

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Birthe

This as much for Jed as for you. Your question is a good one.

Outstanding for me is its an Easy Self-Contained Solution.

Its easy to install. Its easy over network. Its easy to make portable. Saving in it is built in. Once you make the install you are ready to get on with things. How do you get that in one word?

[Mark S.]

Is this a reference to "We Are Legion (We Are Bob)" ?

That would make sense -- Bob is/was the ultimate example of a multi-instance entity.

-- Mark

[Mat]

On Sunday, April 29, 2018 at 3:53:06 PM UTC+2, Jed Carty wrote:

Ok, the new name may just be Bob.

Why it's Jeds Foul Bob Mob plugin. It should be obvious what this plugin does.

<:-)

[Jed Carty]

Bob because it is completely non-descriptive.

But I like Mat's idea of Foul Bob Mob.

[Mat]

@Jed, how - if at all - can your creation be used by the whole community to collectively edit a TW? What would be required for this? 

(sorry if hijacking your thread but I didn't know what to call your creation so figured it might be OK in this thread after all)

<:-)

[Jed Carty]

@Mat

I am working on it. I have had this working on a digital ocean droplet for the past few weeks that we have been using. The last line from the original post about a publicly accessible demo is the first step toward what you are talking about. It uses custom server code that takes care of the authentication and login instead of the tiddlywiki server, but it should be scalable.

It would need a server that can run node and a certificate for the https, something like a digital ocean droplet would probably work. 

[HansWobbe]

Jed:

Can you estimate what level our community would need to start at with https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/ ?

For that matter, can I (as an individual) set up a $5/month account tnad then easily interact with other individuals?

I'm currently managing a large Azure platform and the complexity is daunting.  If this is easier, I may at least be able to seed it.


Cheers,
Hans

[Jed Carty]

I don't have anything concrete to base an estimate on.

I have my little pie server on a raspberry pi 3 that has no trouble serving 15 or 20 wikis for just me running along side a git server and some other custom things. 

The server that we are using for the OokTech wikis (not the ones hosted on ooktech.com, it isn't publicly available) is about equivalent to the $5/month tier and it has been working fine, but it hasn't gotten any heavy use.

If the shared wiki system got about the same use as the google group than it would probably fit onto the smallest server but I am not certain.

The biggest piece that is currently missing is management tools. The built-in tiddlywiki webserver has no access or authentication controls.

The server I made for ooktech has authentication controls for login and different access levels so you can set which wikis a person can see and for individual levels you can set if a person can edit the wiki or just view it and if a person can do administrative tasks like adding new people or new wikis. But so far the interface for all setting that up is editing json files directly. I have been trying to improve it when I have time.

[Ed]

Hi Jed,

Since your introduction of your special TW I havve been reading about it and yesterday
I decided to try it out.

(Low whistle) Marvelous piece of programming! I used tiddlyWin.exe. Within split-second
a TW opened on my screen. it took some experimenting and correcting some mistake
I made with the adress characters and it wasn''t at first clear to me how the ports worked,
but I can now access the stuff via another computer.

That is great as I have been pushing (to no vail so far) some colleagues to try out TW5.
The whole FireFox apocalypse made it impossible, as these solutions seem a bridge to
far for them, but now it is easy as pie, just type in the series of numbers and presto
there it is.

So thank you so much for programming this!!
Uh .. Naming the stuff? I am with TonyM: MultiAccesTW seems fine to me
Salut! Edm.
BTW
Great walk with Robbie autour du Basilica Sainte Clotilde in Paris (with that famous organ)!





Op zaterdag 28 april 2018 19:25:29 UTC+2 schreef Jed Carty:

I am going to change the name of the multiuser plugin because it outgrew that name a few months ago and it is probably leading to more confusion about what the plugin does than anything else.

While I am doing this I am trying to decide if I should split it up into separate plugins or not. This is probably going to be a more involved process than I had hoped, and since tiddlywiki doesn't have a robust plugin dependency system in place it may be a bit of an annoyance to use because of how the  plugins would depend on each other.

So instead of just pushing forward and doing a lot of work splitting up the plugin I am going to ask:

Does anyone who would use the plugin not want the full functionality?

At the moment it can:

- Serve multiple wikis

- Have two-way (almost) immediate updates when a tiddler is edited either in a browser or on the server

- Support multiple people editing the same wiki at the same time

- Convert an html wiki into a new node-based wiki and export a node based wiki as an html wiki (this function is a bit rough still, but eventually it should let you go mostly seemlessly from a single file to node and back)

It does most of this using websockets so there is a server command that uses the web socket adaptor and an external server command that lets you use an external server (like an expressjs server) which makes authentication and access controls much simpler. (I am going to have a publicly accessible demo of the multi-user wiki setup sometime soon, shh! it's a secret.)