Version confusion for new users

[Hegart Dmishiv]

I've just started using TiddlyWiki in the last few days, and am really enjoying it so far. I have lots of previous experience with MediaWiki, so I'm finding that I have to "unlearn" some things from there first. Even so, I've found it quite difficult to learn the new skills for TW, as the information available to beginners like me seems to be spread out and inconsistent between the various versions available. For instance, I see that this Google Groups forum differentiates between [TWC] and [TW5] in the forum blurb, but then it goes on to say...

In addition to questions/answers in this group, there is also a public TiddlySpace containing TiddlyWiki Community Documentation.

...which, from what I have now come to understand, is only for TiddlyWiki Classic. Where is the community documentation for TW5? I was banging my head against a brick wall trying to implement something from the "community documentation" in my first TW wiki, only to realize later that it would never work, as it was for the wrong version. Frustrating!

Also, some of the commonly mentioned options for online hosting of TW wikis, such as TiddlySpace and TiddlySpot, don't seem to advertise (or even allow access to) information about which version of TW they are running. This makes it even more confusing, particularly when trying to synchronize the environment of my local (offline) TW implementation with an online TW host.

Finally, while we're discussing TW versions, the Customizer at TWGuides by Andreas Hahn, which was linked to from the Community tiddler on the main TW5 site, is out of date. It seems to be stuck on TW 5.1.0, but the latest version is TW 5.1.9 apparently. This would be a valuable resource for beginners like me, if only it were up-to-date.

I'm looking forward to learning more about TiddlyWiki, as I implement my own offline knowledgebase with it.

[Mat]

Hi Hegart and welcome!

As you're not the first to note, this is a difficulty. The thing is, the only really "official" site is tiddlywiki.com, and this is run by Jeremy Ruston. People can contribute to this site (via Github) in the same way they contribute to TW itself, but in the end it is what it is because of Jeremys incredible brute force work on it over the years. With the possible exception of a few other individuals, all other info-sites and resources are made from well meaning mortals who put up things hoping it might benefit others. Unfortunately this means it has a much more ephemeral nature to it... If it's not cared for then things decay.

In addition to questions/answers in this group, there is also a public TiddlySpace containing TiddlyWiki Community Documentation.

@Eric

Frankly, this should probably be removed from the blurb. 

Where is the community documentation for TW5? 

There is no equivalent for TW5 and the main problem is that we currently don't have the infrastructure to let community members collectively build up a TW, at least not in any practical way. This will probably be solved when we enable TiddlyWikis to interact ("the Federation") and fetch/assemble data from other TWs but this is not yet implemented.

The closest thing we come to a community-info site is, I'm sad to say, this place i.e this google group.

Also, some of the commonly mentioned options for online hosting of TW wikis, such as TiddlySpace and TiddlySpot, don't seem to advertise (or even allow access to) information about which version of TW they are running. This makes it even more confusing, particularly when trying to synchronize the environment of my local (offline) TW implementation with an online TW host.

TiddlySpace is run by BT (Brittish Telecom) and TiddlySpot is run by fellows Simon and Daniel Baird. I can't comment on BT, but for TiddlySpot it is again single individuals who are just incredibly generous. The thing with TiddlySpot is that you upload/overwrite whatever-the-default version is with whatever you want, i.e the latest version!

BTW, note that TiddlySpace is based on non-TW5 architecture. If you're starting out with TW, I'd advice you to go with TW5, also for other reasons.

Finally, while we're discussing TW versions, the Customizer at TWGuides by Andreas Hahn, which was linked to from the Community tiddler on the main TW5 site, is out of date. It seems to be stuck on TW 5.1.0, but the latest version is TW 5.1.9 apparently. This would be a valuable resource for beginners like me, if only it were up-to-date.

Yes... a really great concept there. Hope it is picked up on. Not sure about the policy on tw.com for referencing outdated stuff... should be discussed actually.

I'm looking forward to learning more about TiddlyWiki, as I implement my own offline knowledgebase with it.

In spite of the issues you've encountered I can testify it is an incredible piece of software. There is much to learn so stick to it. 

<:-) 

[Hegart Dmishiv]

Hi Mat, thanks for the welcome and the extensive reply.

I appreciate the efforts of volunteers working on making TiddlyWiki as great as it is, and particularly the work of Jeremy. I plan to watch the hangout videos at some time soon and catch up with all that has been happening in this space.

This will probably be solved when we enable TiddlyWikis to interact ("the Federation") and fetch/assemble data from other TWs but this is not yet implemented.

This sounds very positive. Is it going to be something like scary transclusion in MediaWiki? Sorry, I'll probably be referring to and comparing TW to MW quite a lot as I learn to use TW. Please understand that it's only as a frame of reference, not as a comparison of the merits of either product.

BTW, note that TiddlySpace is based on non-TW5 architecture. If you're starting out with TW, I'd advice you to go with TW5, also for other reasons.

Thanks for explaining the difference between these sites. As you'll no doubt see in another discussion in this Google Group, I've settled on using Google Drive to host my online ("dev") instance of TiddlyWiki now. All this googlish stuff is making my head spin, as I normally try to avoid Google for privacy reasons, even before the Snowden revelations. That's why I have created a whole new Google account just for my TW interactions.

The thing is, the only really "official" site is tiddlywiki.com, and this is run by Jeremy Ruston. People can contribute to this site (via Github) in the same way they contribute to TW itself...

I do have a GitHub account, but I'm not very familiar with it, as I'm not a software developer, as such. I'm just an end user, and a (former) network administrator. I have some simplistic programming skills, but much of what I learned as a child was based on the 16-bit microEclipse processor or the 8-bit 6502 processor, neither of which are still useful these days. I can copy/paste code snippets in most modern programming languages, but machine code is my mother-tongue.

[Leopold Bloom]

WHY not just run another wiki where collaboration is permitted live? DokuWiki is perfectly capable. Can't we use a DokuWIki instance till TiddlyWiki 5 is ready for collaboration?

Or is there a NIH (not invented here) problem with using a 'competing' software?

[Mat]

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 9:29:15 AM UTC+2, Leopold Bloom wrote:

WHY not just run another wiki where collaboration is permitted live? DokuWiki is perfectly capable to do this. Can't we use a DokuWIki instance till TiddlyWiki 5 is ready for collaboration? 

First of all, anyone is more than welcome to set up anything. It seems the trickiest part is to get people to use/contribute to it - and, not least, to get people to refer to it. It has to gain traction.

Or is there a NIH (not invented here) problem with using a 'competing' software?

I must admit that I personally do feel some dissonance to using other software for this. Not concerning the "competing" aspect but, dammit, we have a wiki software that itself really ought to be the perfect solution to what we need. ...it's not tho.

But overall, no, I would not say it is a "NIH matter".  Besides, googlegroups is NIH of course.

I think, ironically, that people mostly feel this google group, coupled with the tw.com documentation, is good enough for getting the info they need. This lessens the "pressure" to get an alternative even if there is still a need.

But again, the trickiest part seems to be to get people to participate in whatever collaborative solution is put up. 

<:-)

[Mat]

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 3:46:58 AM UTC+2, Hegart Dmishiv wrote:

I appreciate the efforts of volunteers working on making TiddlyWiki as great as it is, and particularly the work of Jeremy. I plan to watch the hangout videos at some time soon and catch up with all that has been happening in this space.

Make sure you find the notes/timelinks that @pmario has kindly created to most of them. 

 

This will probably be solved when we enable TiddlyWikis to interact ("the Federation") and fetch/assemble data from other TWs but this is not yet implemented.

This sounds very positive. Is it going to be something like scary transclusion in MediaWiki? Sorry, I'll probably be referring to and comparing TW to MW quite a lot as I learn to use TW. Please understand that it's only as a frame of reference, not as a comparison of the merits of either product.

I think it is very good that people who have experience with other relevant software and can benchmark TW against them and report. As for what a Federation might be capable of I can't really tell. It is still just talked about. You'll find some discussion on the hangouts. Anyone with thoughts or skills on this matter should definitely come forth because I believe inter-connected TWs will revolutionize TW.

BTW, note that TiddlySpace is based on non-TW5 architecture. If you're starting out with TW, I'd advice you to go with TW5, also for other reasons.

Thanks for explaining the difference between these sites. As you'll no doubt see in another discussion in this Google Group, I've settled on using Google Drive to host my online ("dev") instance of TiddlyWiki now. All this googlish stuff is making my head spin, as I normally try to avoid Google for privacy reasons, even before the Snowden revelations. That's why I have created a whole new Google account just for my TW interactions.

Yes, one main point with TW is privacy. This is also, I believe, why there is reluctance to start using another "free" forum software.

<:-)

[Hegart Dmishiv]

Hi Mat,

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 9:25:01 PM UTC+12, Mat wrote:

On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 3:46:58 AM UTC+2, Hegart Dmishiv wrote:

I plan to watch the hangout videos at some time soon and catch up with all that has been happening in this space.

Make sure you find the notes/timelinks that @pmario has kindly created to most of them. 

Thanks, I've just watched the first 1hr of the earliest available hangout video, Hangout #3 from Jun 3, 2013, and almost fell asleep during some of the discussion about pull requests with Git. Sorry, that's not really of interest to me at all. I've had a look through the collated information by @pmario on TiddlySpace, so I can now skim through the information there much quicker, thanks for that. It would be really neat if that same information was also able to be referenced by topic rather than just by date, but I guess that would be quite a huge undertaking.

I would imagine that it would take thousands of individual small tiddlers, one for each relevant time mark, for each hangout, all tagged according to content topic and hangout number, so that they can be listed either by topic or by hangout number. Or maybe just tagged by topic, with the time mark and hangout number forming the tiddler title. As you can see, I'm starting to get a TW mindset, slowly. I'm still trying to work out the best way to achieve things using TW.

I'm not saying I am offering to do this myself for the hangout video's, and I'm certainly not putting my hand up to volunteer for anything just yet. What @pmario has there at present is certainly a great start, and very helpful as it is. It's just that, while skimming through the information contained there, I see lots of discussions happening in the more recent hangouts of 2015 that seem to be a rehash of content that was covered in that first hangout video I've half-watched from mid-2013. For instance, Hangout #82 (Mar 14, 2015) covers the plugin repository, which was discussed at length in Hangout #3. Has this issue still not been resolved? Maybe cross-referencing all the previous discussions on that issue alone could help reveal the current state of the issue, how the situation has progressed to the present, and what might be needed to resolve it. Just my 2¢ worth, from the perspective of a n00b.

[Mat]

Come on. Surely you should watch at least the first 10 hangouts from 2013. Just drink lots of coffee.

Seriusly... don't. If anything, you should watch them in reversed order and, well, "just a few". It is even tough to watch the new ones unless there's some specific issue you care about. But 2013 - those are outdated issues. Not saying they've necessarily been solved but new aspects come in and things change.

But as you note, we're again limited in that it is tricky to collaboratively refine the material, and expecting individuals to make such efforts so that the result is good enough to be generally useful... well, that is too much to ask from anyone even if what Mario has done is probably as close as it gets. 

Of late, Jeremy has also put up agendas on tiddlyspot; http://hangout-XX.tiddlyspot.com/ with XX being the number of the hangout.

The hangouts are a good opportunity to bring up current issues and I guess there's some social value too. It also allows more elaborate explanations on things than the... elaborateur... might otherwise not type as text. Plus we often get to see Eric pumping himself with coffee to stay awake which increases the entertainment level ;-)

<:-)

[Hegart Dmishiv]

On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 12:02:39 AM UTC+12, Mat wrote:

But as you note, we're again limited in that it is tricky to collaboratively refine the material, and expecting individuals to make such efforts so that the result is good enough to be generally useful... well, that is too much to ask from anyone even if what Mario has done is probably as close as it gets. 

I think that the idea raised above by @Leopold has some merit to it here. I'm not suggesting any particular host, but I do think it would be good to get something collaborative going in the meantime, on a par with what there is currently available for TiddlyWiki Classic. Something that would ensure data portability, so that the effort is not wasted once the Tiddlyverse is up and running. Of course, the problem with doing that is the possibility for those who are already working hard on federating TW to lose their focus in order to set this all up. So it needs to be something that can be established and run by the community, with minimal impact on the core developers.

[Handoko Suwono]

wow, a great revise to TW versions. Not much to add, the classic TW has reached the version 2.78 and jump directly into TW5. A quite change of TW core and the way it behaves.

> MediaWiki? Sorry, I'll probably be referring to and comparing TW to MW
> quite a lot as I learn to use TW. Please understand that it's only as a
> frame of reference, not as a comparison of the merits of either product.

For MW, you did mean MediaWiki instead the WikiMedia, the foundation behinds wikipedia. MW is server based while TWc and TW5 are not.  There is a mediawiki/MW translator which is based on TW classic.

handoko -

[Hegart Dmishiv]

On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 5:25:42 PM UTC+12, Handoko Suwono wrote:

> MediaWiki? Sorry, I'll probably be referring to and comparing TW to MW
> quite a lot as I learn to use TW. Please understand that it's only as a
> frame of reference, not as a comparison of the merits of either product.

For MW, you did mean MediaWiki instead the WikiMedia, the foundation behinds wikipedia. MW is server based while TWc and TW5 are not.  There is a mediawiki/MW translator which is based on TW classic.

Yes, I definitely meant MediaWiki, the server-based wiki software, not WikiMedia (WM) the organisation behind Wikipedia (WP). Not to be confused further with WordPress (WP) or WordPerfect (WP) either, haha. The part of my quote you omitted above, where I linked to scary transclusion on the MediaWiki website, might have made that clear. ;)