2 ms·

A visual editor does not solve mediawiki's bloat which is useless for 99% of anyone who isn't Wikipedia or another large organization, nor MediaWiki being entir

A visual editor does not solve mediawiki's bloat which is useless for 99% of anyone who isn't Wikipedia or another large organization, nor MediaWiki being entirely organized around pages. Nor does it solve Mediawiki's ugly, Web 1.0 design. In Bookstack, making the server private is one or two clicks. In mediawiki you have to set at least half a dozen config file variables. Adding any of a slew of auth methods is trivial in Bookstack. In mediawiki it's finding an extension, figuring out how to configure it, and then worrying about keeping it up to date. Bookstack is focused on "books", chapters, pages, sections - not "pages." It's perfect for what most people and projects need, and it looks fucking gorgeous out of the box to boot.

ssddanbrown 5y ago
> It's perfect for what most people and projects need, and it looks fucking gorgeous out of the box to boot. Thank you so much! > In mediawiki it's finding an extension, figuring out how to configure it, and then worrying about keeping it up to date. I've always attempted to be "batteries included" with BookStack due to this frustration. Means we have to be more limited in abilities but hopefully provide a better experience for what we do allow.
bawolff 5y ago
> In Bookstack, making the server private is one or two clicks. In mediawiki you have to set at least half a dozen config file variables. This isn't really true. During install process you are asked which you want. If you press the private button when prompted you get a private wiki. If you press public you get public. If you want to change after you installed, you do have to edit a text based config file. You only have to edit two lines, but i appreciate that text based config file is a turn off for some people. > Bookstack is focused on "books", chapters, pages, sections - not "pages." I agree that this is a significant difference from mediawiki. You can do that sort of thing in MediaWiki, but you'll be swimming upstream. [Dislaimer: im a mediawiki developer]

ssddanbrown 5y ago

> It's perfect for what most people and projects need, and it looks fucking gorgeous out of the box to boot. Thank you so much! > In mediawiki it's finding an extension, figuring out how to configure it, and then worrying about keeping it up to date. I've always attempted to be "batteries included" with BookStack due to this frustration. Means we have to be more limited in abilities but hopefully provide a better experience for what we do allow.

bawolff 5y ago

> In Bookstack, making the server private is one or two clicks. In mediawiki you have to set at least half a dozen config file variables. This isn't really true. During install process you are asked which you want. If you press the private button when prompted you get a private wiki. If you press public you get public. If you want to change after you installed, you do have to edit a text based config file. You only have to edit two lines, but i appreciate that text based config file is a turn off for some people. > Bookstack is focused on "books", chapters, pages, sections - not "pages." I agree that this is a significant difference from mediawiki. You can do that sort of thing in MediaWiki, but you'll be swimming upstream. [Dislaimer: im a mediawiki developer]