WIKI documentation Software?

Wed Mar 18 03:59:24 UTC 2020

If you intend to fully self host something, the full mediawiki software
that runs the back end of wikipedia is suitable. It's entirely composed of
BSD/GPL/Apache licensed software. If you have any persons who are competent
at administering and customizing stuff on normal LAMP stack servers it
should be easy to install and understand. The VisualEditor extension is the
same WYSIWYG GUI for editing in browser as is used on full wikipedia today.
For an example go to any public wikipedia page and hit 'edit', make some
changes but don't save them.

https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=mediawiki+visualeditor&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 7:07 AM Brielle <bruns at 2mbit.com> wrote:

> I personally like Dokuwiki a lot.
>
> From a usability standpoint, once you spend a few learning the interface,
> it’s very simplistic and not overwhelming in features.  You can always add
> extensions for stuff you need that isn’t there out of box.
>
> From a technical standpoint, it doesn’t need a database.  The entire
> structure is text files, so it can be run on even a super small VM, and
> doing backups is as easy as tarballing the data directory.
>
> It’s got support for LDAP for authentication too, which might be useful.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Mar 14, 2020, at 7:24 AM, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2020-03-14 at 08:07 -0400, Craig wrote:
> >> Wanted to ask what WIKI software teams are using to save
> >> documentation to /
> >> how to's for staff, etc.
> >
> > Like any other software, make a set of requirements and then go
> > looking. The order of those two steps is important, though you're
> > allowed to iterate.
> >
> > Remember to match the requirements to the people who will actually be
> > using the thing, not the people who will be managing it :-)
> >
> > Personally I think the plethora of formatting options in things like
> > Confluence tends to distract people into spending vast amounts of time
> > getting their pages to look just right, that would have been better
> > spent capturing more actual information. Or it makes them avoid adding
> > information because it's too hard, or it takes too long, or it invites
> > odious comparisons with other people's entries.
> >
> > Regards, K.
> >
> > --
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)
> > http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
> > http://twitter.com/kauer389
> >
> > GPG fingerprint: 2561 E9EC D868 E73C 8AF1 49CF EE50 4B1D CCA1 5170
> > Old fingerprint: 8D08 9CAA 649A AFEF E862 062A 2E97 42D4 A2A0 616D
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20200317/8e00e250/attachment.html>