Tags:
competition2Add my vote for this tag create new tag
, view all tags
I just saw this posted as a top activity project of SourceForge.net.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/tikiwiki

-- GrantBow - 18 Dec 2002

Some nice features:

  • Syntax to prevent converting Smashed words into wiki names use: ))SomeIdea(( for us: ]]SomeIdea[[ instead of nop
  • New registration mode, now you can make Tiki validate users email address by sending them an email with a link to first-login in Tiki, once activated the user will login normally with his password. Of course this feature is optional and can be enabled/disabled from the Admin screen.
  • Optionally Tiki can display a "I forgot my password link" for unregistered users to allow users that have forgotten their password to get it by email. You can enable/disable this feature from the Admin screen.
  • The edit button now shows on red if someone may be editing the page, this helps preventingtwo users from editing the same page. This feature can be enabled/disabled from the admin menu.
  • Image galleries are collections of images, users can create galleries and upload images to their galleries or public galleries. You can select the number of thumbnails to appear in rows/files of galleries as well as the thumbnails size. Thumbnails are automatically created by Tiki, you don’t have to upload them. Galleries can be used for albums, stories, showrooms and many other applications.
    • Twiki has some plugin for that?

For some reason, I did not found docs as html pages - just huge PDF/DOC files. frown

-- PeterMasiar - 19 Dec 2002

Other nice sounding features:

  • Backups feature: create, download, upload and restore complete backups
  • Claims that it outputs valid XHTML code and uses CSS to deploy themes, however it is not valid, a good try though.
  • Send and receive Wiki pages from/to other Tiki-enabled sites, using an XMLRPC API (I couldn't find an example of this feature though).

It's wierd that the main Tiki site (http://tikiwiki.sourceforge.net/) is not a wiki, while the demo site (http://research.salutia.com/tiki/tiki-index.php) is a wiki, but actually has very little content: ~20 Wiki pages (mostly idle blather) and only 1 or 2 each of the non-wiki page types (article, blog, forum, file gallery, FAQ). Overall I think it has a stronger Slashdot/PhpNuke/BBS orientation than a wiki one. A good beginning to synthesizing the two community building approaches. It'll be interesting to see where this project ends up in a couple of years.

On the surface it appears to be a very active project, but looking closer it's hard to see where everything happens. In cvs and the mailing lists I suppose. Speaking of activity... I wonder where TWiki would sit in the Sourceforge rankings if all the topic edits in Codev where mirrored to a cvs branch? smile

-- MattWilkie - 19 Dec 2002

One of the more interesting aspects of Tiki is the development speed. A major new feature release every few weeks. They just released 1.4 which includes jHotDraw for embedded drawings on a Wiki page and many other new features.

-- JamesThompson - 19 Dec 2002

Tiki has some interesting features and is an active project.

Keep in mind that SourceForge's activity percentile makes only sense for projects that make use of all SF features like download, bug tracking etc. Here is a comparison as of today:

  Stats Activity Percentile daily page views CVS check-ins in last 7 days
Tiki: stats 99.9906% 2500 95
TWiki: stats 80.0376% 6000 82

In other words, TWiki is more active then Tiki in terms of page views and in the same range in terms of CVS activity, but has a lower SF activity percentile because TWiki uses only a few SF services.

-- PeterThoeny - 12 Jan 2003

What activity we can easily fake to get better rating? I mean, it is a shame - AFAICT Tiki's homepage is not even a wiki. And they beat us? Best perl wiki in this cluster of galaxies?

-- PeterMasiar - 14 Jan 2003

I strongly discourage the idea of faking better ratings. However I have no problem with using the SF system so that it provides a more accurate reflection of the true twiki activity.

Statistics for All Time (from TWiki Stats and Tiki Stats)

Project Lifespan Rank Page Views D/l Bugs Support Patches All Trkr Tasks CVS
Tiki days 2730 (46.19) 1,935 25 1 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) 819
TWiki days 3903 (48.51) 1,508,743 0 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (0) 0 (0) 1,488

After looking through the various stats pages for awhile I am truly mystified as to why Tiki has such a strong activity rating. All of the other top 10 projects absolutely tromp it by several orders of magnitude.

The only single category where Tiki has noticeably more activity than TWiki is downloads; if that is the only category which counts, the remedy is easy (see second bullet below).

Page views are obviously ignored, or weighted very lightly, because they reflect twiki.org activity more than twiki-code activity, which is closer to sourceforge's purpose (supporting free code, support of free online communities is incidental).

Suggestions to improve Sourceforge statistical accuracy for TWiki:

  1. All release announcements and developer news mirrored to the sf news (currently only production releases are announced)
  2. Nightly CVS builds (aka TWikiAlphaRelease) mirrored to sf downloads (right now nothing is posted in the files section)
  3. ...other ideas?

-- MattWilkie - 14 Jan 2003

If downloads are the key distinction, this is not an easy issue at all given TWiki's current download policy. Not only technical project growth but organizational project growth can force changes at the most inopportune times.

-- GrantBow - 15 Jan 2003

[snip] discussion on the "must register to download" policy moved to NoRegisterDownload by MattWilkie

... also, "a download (of Twiki) a day keeps TikiWiki at bay" policy might give Twiki a position among wikis which it deserves. wink

-- PeterMasiar - 15 Jan 2003

There is no registration requirement to download TWikiAlphaRelease, ergo there should be no problem mirroring alpha releases to the sourceforge page.

Maybe we should move this to a new topic since we're no longer really talking about TikiWiki. Perhaps ImproveTWikiSFStats...

-- MattWilkie - 16 Jan 2003

Or ImproveTWikiRating

-- PeterMasiar - 16 Jan 2003

I am also a member of another community called BrainStorms (BS). http://www.rheingold.com/community.html Community members frequently share an understanding Howard Rheingold, his work such as his new book and excellent website. http://www.smartmobs.com Community members often have overlapping interests. I recommend anyone interested in talking about collaboration to drop Howard an email as instructed by the above html page and mention my name. This community has grown quite large in it's four years. </shameless plug>

Someone on BS mentioned TikiWiki. It uses a database abstraction engine (PEAR) and a templating system for PHP (Smarty). I'm impressed after a quick review of the current websites. (Even if the PHP sites seem to crash Mozilla and I have to use Konqueror!) I'm thinking about playing with one myself here at home to see what it can do. Has anyone reading this actually installed a TikiWiki before?

-- GrantBow - 31 Mar 2003

Grant - I have been very interested in TikiWiki myself and attempted to install it on my hosted domain. Unfortunately, I ran into some problems with PEAR which I have not yet resolved. I'd be very interested in hearing anyone's experience with it. I am in a position to recommend a CMS/portal package for an extensive on-line community project. I would like to recommend my personal favorite (TWiki, of course smile ) but need a package that has more polish and features right off the bat. TikiWiki is my next top choice due to it's wiki foundation. I'll report back when I get it up and running.

-- LynnwoodBrown - 31 Mar 2003

More comments on ImproveTWikiRating

-- MartinCleaver - 11 Apr 2003

Opinion of a TikiWiki user (WillNorris who likes Twiki more): lots of features, but horrible wikiml syntax, the ui is overwhelming

-- PeterMasiar - 18 Nov 2003

Comments on Tiki vs TWiki can be found on TWikiAndTikiUserExperiences.

-- CrawfordCurrie - 12 Dec 2003

I've been using TikiWiki extensively for the last six months. My main comment is that TikiWiki's primary strength--it is extremely feature rich--is it's primary weakness--it is TOO feature rich.

Major features of TikiWiki are a wiki, blog, webmail, forums, articles/news, html pages, calendar, photo gallery, file gallery/manager, FAQ, links manager, surveys, polls, categories, search and many more lesser known features (jGraphPad, games, a mapserver module), all under one permissioning and login system (which can authenticate to the DB or to LDAP). Also, the DB abstraction engine switched from PEAR to adodb (with version 1.8), so it can now support MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle, Sybase, etc. and it uses the Smarty PHP templating engine. You can also comment on the wiki's, blogs, articles and forums and categorize all the content. For site developers and admins, all aspects of a site built with TikiWiki can be administered through the browser (editing of templates, CSS files, uploading of images, creating menus, turning features on and off, etc.). This feature set is also it's major weakness, in that there are many features to develop and any one feature may not have the latest and greatest functionality.

Having said that, the TikiWiki development rate has been blazing fast, with a new RC or stable release done just about every month and the community is very active. Most of the activity happens over IRC and CVS. The tikiwiki.org website is becoming more and more active with help provided in the forums.

Hope this helps.

-- TomWhite - 10 Feb 2004

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r20 < r19 < r18 < r17 < r16 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r20 - 2004-12-07 - SamHasler
 
  • Learn about TWiki  
  • Download TWiki
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by Perl Hosted by OICcam.com Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback. Ask community in the support forum.
Copyright © 1999-2017 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.