Straw Poll on Wiki Software

[David Recordon]

It seems that the discussion is centering around two options for an OWF wiki:
1) hosted PBWiki on their "Project" plan for no charge
2) self-hosted MediaWiki

For PBWiki, the pros are:
- no additional hosting infrastructure
- the wiki software used by OpenID, OAuth and Activity Streams

and the cons are:
- their backup format is not directly compatible with a piece of open
source wiki software
- MediaWiki has broader familiarity

For MediaWiki, the pros are:
- broad familiarity among open source projects
- it's open source

and the cons are:
- we need to host it, upgrade it, back it up

To try to judge if we have consensus, where do you stand between the
two options?

--David

[David Recordon]

I lean toward the hosted PBWiki route for simplicity.

I prefer infrastructure that we don't need to host. The plan that we
would sign up for allows data export and there seems to be at least
one script floating around to convert from PBWiki to MediaWiki (http://
wikiangela.com/wiki/Importing_pbwiki_to_mediawiki). While I like the
"use open source" argument in principal, Google Groups are much more
usable and friendly than mailman!

--David

[Christian Crumlish]

As long as we're not locked in, I have no problem with us using pbwiki.

-xian-

[Anthony Broad-Crawford]

I second the "go hosted and keep it simple" pbworks proposal.   

--
Anthony Broad-Crawford
www.anthonybroadcrawford.com
www.twitter.com/broadcrawford

This email is:   [ X ] bloggable    [ ] ask first   [  ] private

[Chris Messina]

Since I'm an admin on several wikis, my biggest concern is with maintaining the software as well as the person-power to manage self-hosted software. I've already seen how this group is tight for time, and while it may not sound like much at the outset, managing software well requires resources and attention.

If for no other reason, I support a hosted solution where we outsource the infrastructure needs in order to focus on our more primary objectives.

Given the content of this poll, I thus support using PBWiki.

Chris

--
Chris Messina
Open Web Advocate

Personal site: http://factoryjoe.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina

Diso Project: http://diso-project.org
OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net

This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private

[Simon Phipps]

Before voting I'd be interested to hear some concrete reasons why
Wikia is unsuitable - it combines hosted service with MediaWiki.

S.

[Chris Messina]

Likewise, are there pros to using Wikia? Anyone have actual experience using them?

[Simon Phipps]

Some pros:

*  It's MediaWiki, so we have plenty of choice for other hosting including boutique services and self-host

*  It's very familiar to most of us because of Wikipedia

*  It's open source

*  It's free of charge

S.

[Chris Messina]

Cool, thanks Simon. Does it support OpenID? At first glance, it seems not to.

[Simon Phipps]

No, they have their own login system (like the Wikipedia one although not shared with Wikipedia). This is Jimmy Wales' commercial venture, and one goal seems to be to create a social space in the same competitive ecosystem as Facebook and MySpace. 

[James Walker]

So... I don't know much about wikia (I'm not even really a fan of
wikis) - but, I'd like to throw in a -1 for PB(wiki|works).

I appreciate the "it's there, it works" approach, but I would like to
see the OWF work towards evangelizing Open Web standards & tools by
means of illustrating best practices.

Nascent organizations such as ours always need some bootstrapping - so
getting something up and running ASAP is key. Longer term, however, I
think we should strive to use tools that best exemplify the principles
the foundation exists to protect & promote. So, Wikia (by virtue of
being hosted MediaWiki) seems like a stronger choice. We should be
striving to use Free/ Open Source software that implements/promotes
the Open Web standards that we care about.

my $0.02 CAD ;-)

.j

--
James Walker :: http://walkah.net/ :: xmpp:wal...@walkah.net

[Brendan Quinn]

Personally I would lean towards MediaWiki, mainly because it has real wiki markup. I think maintaining it ourselves is just the price we have to pay.

But having said that -- it seems that we can sum up the arguments as "MediaWiki is a better piece of software, but PBWiki is better infrastructure-wise because we don't have to worry about hosting."

So if we can find a way of getting MediaWiki hosted for us, that's the best of both worlds, right?

I think someone mentioned that Wikia.com offers a hosted version of MedaWiki, is that a reasonable compromise? Would they give us a free account?

Brendan.

[Brady Brim-DeForest]

Agreed. Pbwiki is is great. However, MediaWiki isn't particularly time
consuming to setup either. The real cost is in the amount of time
fixing things if something goes wrong, fighting off spammers, etc.

In my mind, a hosted option is the clear winner, although the downside
isn't risk free. There's the the lack of customization, and...

...When considering the long term plan for the OWF incubator, I think
that the technology stack we choose now should take into consideration
what we can roll as a packaged solution for open source projects and
orgs in the future. Clearly, this will be most cost effective and
achievable with open source software.

But, back to the matter at hand...If we are looking at both open
source and commercial options, we should check out Confluence. It's a
very powerful enterprise wiki platform and the team at Atlassian may
even offer us a hosted version for free.

-Brady

Sent from my iPhone

[Chris Messina]

Clearly Dave's straw poll went awry.

We now have on the table: 

* hosted: PBWiki, Wikia, Confluence (?)

* self-hosted: MediaWiki, Confluence (?)

I wonder if we should also be determining WHO would be responsible for any of these solutions should they get picked? I mean, picking the software is a matter of personal preference (with a dash of ideology thrown in). Making sure we have experienced folks on hand to setup our infrastructure the way we want is the harder part.

So, perhaps a refactoring of this straw poll:

"Presuming that you would be responsible for maintaining it, which wiki platform would you want to use?"

For my own part, if it were my job, I'd stick with PBWiki because it's what I'm familiar with. But, if the OWF wiki isn't going to be my responsibility (and I primarily mean care and gardening), I'm happy to have another maintainer step up and claim that responsibility with a platform that they're good at managing.

Chris

[David Recordon]

I'm unable to find a FAQ about it, but Wikia wikis seem to be covered
in ads. :-\ http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

[Ian Lawrence]

Hi,
webfaction [1] offer a one click installer for Media Wiki and ssh onto
the server. They also offer free hosting for worthwhile projects like
this. webfaction is run by remi (the guy who founded the cherry py
project) so they are pretty knowledgeable and very helpful . B.T.W I
have nothing to do with them apart from having my server there.

HTH
Ian

[1] http://www.webfaction.com/
[2] www.cherrypy.org/
--
http://ianlawrence.info

[Simon Phipps]

Certainly each page has an ad on it, yes. "Covered" is hyperbolic.
Personally I subconsciously filter out ads on web pages as long as
they haven't done a Sys-Con, so don't care, but I'm aware others are
more concerned by them. I've been looking for a "paid member"option
on Wikia, there doesn't seem to be one - I'd never worried before (I
mainly visit http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

S.

[Nathan DiNiro]

I've yet to weigh-in on this, and the present seems like the most appropriate time.

I have a strong feeling that we should stick with an OSS solution if possible. A great deal of the reason why I am involved and continue to be involved in standards efforts like OWF and OpenID is because I believe in the philosophy around open source and open standards. My primary mission is to help the philosophy and solutions reach a wider audience. To that, I'm very sensitive to the perception that "open" gets in the marketplace.

I think it's important for an organization conceived to shepherd various open standards efforts to "eat the dog food". While I completely agree with the notion that simple and hosted would normally be the most logical/desirable solution, in the case of a fledgling organization such as ours I think managing the perception is vital. We have space and resources at the OSL so why not take advantage of that resource and not only appear to be participating in the wider open source/open standards community, but actually walk the talk.

In the spirit of making a suggestion equals volunteering to do it, I'm offering to get a mediawiki instance set up and to manage it, and also trowing my hat in the ring to Chair this department. I have solicited the able assistance of a few Portland locals who work with and for local Wiki companies to help with the set-up and initial safeguards against spamming, etc. They have even offered to spend time helping to curate. Further, I am just down the road from the OSL (compared to the most of rest of the OWF diaspora ;) ), so in the event that a site visit is necessary, it's a 2 hour drive. Not to mention that a few beers with the admins down there can possibly go a long way in a pinch ;)

I'm also on board with the idea that we'll want to permit easy instantiation of an environment for standards efforts who want to work with OWF, please recall Eran's directive that we should be primarily focused on getting something in place for the OWF to get off the ground, not the final solution.

Thanks all!

-Nate

EM: uncl...@gmail.com
TW: @unclenate
PH: 503-449-9943

[Nate Benes]

I agree with Nathan, although PBWorks is convenient and a little lower maintenance; I think it is an important time for us to set the bar.  And I would also be willing to help maintain this part of the project.

Nate
na...@grapepudding.com

[David Recordon]

Hey Nate,
If you're willing to step up and manage, update, etc the MediaWiki
install then I'm fine with it. There will also be some transition
work from our current hosting setup to a new one sometime hopefully
later this month.

--David

[Chris Messina]

Given Nate's offer to support the solution he suggested, I support him doing so. Having somone who is responsible for the solution is much more important to me than software at this point.

Also, Wikia's ads don't really complement the message of the OWF:

http://skit.ch/i8h

Chris

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Nathan DiNiro <uncl...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Simon Phipps]

Awesome, thanks for volunteering.  I wonder what it would take to get OpenID support added to MediaWiki?

[David Recordon]

There is an old extension in PHP that needs some updating and love.
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:OpenID

--David

[Nathan DiNiro]

I was thinking about that as well, Simon. I'm going to see if I can't energize some locals to put something together on that front. Would be a terrific bit of OpenID news ;)

Cheers,

Nate

EM: uncl...@gmail.com
TW: @unclenate
PH: 503-449-9943

[Nathan DiNiro]

Cool! I'm going to bug Will Norris to see if he's willing & able...

EM: uncl...@gmail.com
TW: @unclenate
PH: 503-449-9943

[RobDolinOWF]

As another member of the "OWF diaspora" ;) If we want to look at
hosted, I'd like to also suggest Seattle-based http://www.wetpaint.com/.

I've just looked at it briefly, but they have a pretty good API story:
http://www.wetpaintinjected.com/

FWIW--
--Rob

> EM: unclen...@gmail.com
> TW: @unclenate
> PH: 503-449-9943

> >> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Simon Phipps <webm...@gmail.com>

> >> James Walker ::http://walkah.net/:: xmpp:wal...@walkah.net<xmpp%3Awal...@walkah.net>

>
> > --
> > Chris Messina
> > Open Web Advocate
>
> > Personal site:http://factoryjoe.com
> > Twitter:http://twitter.com/chrismessina
>
> > Diso Project:http://diso-project.org
> > OpenID Foundation:http://openid.net
>

> > This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[RobDolinOWF]

In my limited experience with MediaWiki, it seems like a rather
powerful platform.

I agree with David and Chris that IF there is someone (or ideally two
someone's) willing to support MediaWiki, it would have my thumbs-up.
It looks like the Microformats wiki is also using Mediawiki:
http://microformats.org/wiki/Main_Page

FWIW--
--Rob

On Aug 10, 10:52 am, Nathan DiNiro <unclen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cool! I'm going to bug Will Norris to see if he's willing & able...
>

> EM: unclen...@gmail.com
> TW: @unclenate
> PH: 503-449-9943

>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:49 AM, David Recordon <record...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > There is an old extension in PHP that needs some updating and love.
> >http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:OpenID
>
> > --David
>

> > > EM: unclen...@gmail.com
> > > TW: @unclenate
> > > PH: 503-449-9943
>
> > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Chris Messina <chris.mess...@gmail.com>

> > >>> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Simon Phipps <webm...@gmail.com>

> > >>> James Walker ::http://walkah.net/:: xmpp:wal...@walkah.net<xmpp%3Awal...@walkah.net>

>
> > >> --
> > >> Chris Messina
> > >> Open Web Advocate
>
> > >> Personal site:http://factoryjoe.com
> > >> Twitter:http://twitter.com/chrismessina
>
> > >> Diso Project:http://diso-project.org
> > >> OpenID Foundation:http://openid.net
>

[Chris Messina]

I STRONGLY OPPOSE using WetPaint for anything.

They bashed OpenID after implementing it incorrectly and blaming all their problems on it.

I'll have nothing to do with them. But that's just me.

Chris 

[Brady Brim-DeForest]

Nate, thanks for volunteering to do this.

Would love to see the wiki setup at: wiki.openwebfoundation.org

Thoughts?

--
Brady Brim-DeForest
www.brimdeforest.com (the blog)
www.tubefilter.tv (the company)

Follow me: twitter.com/bradybd

This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private

[David Recordon]

I think that's the obvious URL. :)

[Brady Brim-DeForest]

Agreed — I just wasn't sure who has control of DNS zones for the domain.

--
Brady Brim-DeForest
www.brimdeforest.com (the blog)
www.tubefilter.tv (the company)

Follow me: twitter.com/bradybd

This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private

[Brendan Quinn]

I'm happy to be the other someone -- I already offered last week to get mediawiki installed on wiki.openwebfoundation.org (or www.openwebfoundation.org/wiki, I'm not fussed) if someone can give me shell access.

2009/8/10 RobDolinOWF <OpenWebF...@wuxx.com>

[Nate Benes]

I am also willing to be the other one to support mediawiki...

Nate

[Nathan DiNiro]

Access is clearly in the critical path, but I suspect that a vote or appointment is necessary to get the ball rolling. I think once the closure of the volunteering period happens tonight, we'll be able to move in earnest.

Eran/Dave, is this correct?

-Nate

EM: uncl...@gmail.com
TW: @unclenate
PH: 503-449-9943

[Nate Benes]

Good point.

[David Recordon]

I think votes are needed when there isn't consensus, if we have
consensus then I'm not as worried about holding an actual vote. Eran
might disagree. :)

I'm going to email the OSU OSL to figure out what our plan should be
to help get stuff rolling.

--David

[Eran Hammer-Lahav]

Committees can find their own sweet spot for making decisions. Votes are generally best avoided for stuff like this. This is where the role of a chair is instrumental to running a successful committee. The chair, each according to their own style, has to build consensus and call consensus. That is usually enough to make decisions, appoints people, and get work down. If someone has an objection, the chair has to address it.

 

Once the committee is formed (tonight), it can quickly elect a chair (a committee member). So far only one person asked to be considered for the role. If more people will want to serve as chair, the committee will hold a quick vote. I would suggest an open vote since this is not a very political issue (but the committee may choose to do it differently).

 

EHL