[HN Gopher] Show HN: BookStack - An open source wiki platform an... ___________________________________________________________________ Show HN: BookStack - An open source wiki platform and alternative to Confluence Author : ssddanbrown Score : 415 points Date : 2022-01-08 14:12 UTC (8 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.bookstackapp.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.bookstackapp.com) | LeicaLatte wrote: | Book stack is great! | marcodiego wrote: | Confluence + Jira is a common combination. It is good to have an | alternative to one of these. Anyone has info or suggestion on | what are good open source alternatives for Jira? | budafish wrote: | Some time ago I was trying to transition to platform to help me | capture my own personal notes and organise my knowledge. | BookStack was a good front runner, but I think the lack of mobile | editing along with the hassle of upgrades made me end up using | Notion. | | Now by all means notion isn't perfect at all, but for me who just | wanted to start writing notes it seems the right choice at the | time. | | I would like to switch to BookStack as it looks great and is a | great product, but the one issue that worries me is when it comes | to upgrades and migrations. Generally I found when upgrading | database based platforms I end up messing up hugely causing | myself a huge headache, and then eventually not upgrading at all. | For example I used Monica CRM, and totally botched the upgrades | eventually just closing it down and using Google contacts | instead. | | If there was an easy way to solve for that I'd definitely be on | board with self-hosting it myself. But at the moment I just don't | have the time to resolve upgrade issues :( | ssddanbrown wrote: | I can understand that, Especially since Monica and BookStack | share the same framework. Database issues do happen | unfortunately, although I take changes pretty seriously when | approach schema changes. For those that have requested support | upon such issues, I've been able to get them up and running | again in the vast majority of cases. | throwaway9492 wrote: | We actually moved from Confluence to Bookstack last year, mainly | because the EOL for the Atlassian server-licenses. Sure, it has | less features, but the main function, maintaining content by non- | tech people works great! | | Thanks for creating this app. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Good to hear about another successful transition from | Confluence! | LilBytes wrote: | This looks PERFECT. | | I'll trial it out tomorrow. I can see on individual pages | (books?) you're tracking changes, e.g. created and last edited. | Are these changes tracked in a history page for version control | by any chance, ssdanbrown/OP? | ssddanbrown wrote: | > Are these changes tracked in a history page for version | control by any chance, ssdanbrown/OP? | | Most system changes (Create, Updated, Delete actions) are | recorded and displayed in an audit log view for admins. As of | the most recentl release, you can trigger webhooks upon any of | these; Video example [1]. | | Changes to pages (where documentation content exists) do have | their state changes recorded so you can revert/view/compare | across versions of a page. The revision limit is set to 50 by | default (I think) but this is configurable. | | You can login to the demo as an admin to preview these features | if needed [2]. | | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zIp1ruGpoI [2] | https://demo.bookstackapp.com/login?email=admin@example.com&... | thecrumb wrote: | Looks nice. I have an old docuwiki install I need to do something | with. Might be time to try something new. | polote wrote: | Maybe BookStack can do fine for a company with a few dozens of | employees. But Confluence can handle tens of thousands of | employees. So I wouldn't label Bookstack as a Confluence | alternative. | | Maybe I'm missing something, but BookStack doesn't even have a | notion of "teams" only roles. You can't give permission of a file | to a user, only to all users who have a certain role. | | But I'm certainly biased as I'm building a real Confluence | alternative | emptysongglass wrote: | Confluence is terrible in all kinds of other ways. To be frank, | it's the worst company documentation software I've ever used. | Discoverability is terrible and it's easy to end up in a | situation with thousands of pages that quickly fall out of | maintenance because features for organization are an after | thought. Its own markup is terrible and its Markdown import | support similarly so. | | Most wikis are terrible at evergreen notes: the only one I can | think of that might be moving the ball forward is Athens | Research though I wasn't able to get their self-hosted beta | running and I host dozens of other services with Compose. | | Obsidian might be good too, but they don't seem too keen on | supporting large business collab usecases even though | enterprise is a cashcow. | polote wrote: | > Confluence is terrible in all kinds of other ways. | | I disagree, Confluence is used by tens of thousands of | organizations and they don't have a very good Sales strategy, | that means a lot of business choose them when they could have | choose something else. So I can't buy that it is terrible | everywhere. | | Can we do better ? Hell yeah. But I agree with you that most | of Confluence competitors are in the SMB space even though | money is in large enterprise. (But that's why we are building | Dokkument) | | That's not wikis that are bad at evergreen notes, that's | evergreen notes that are not suitable for sharing with teams. | Athens or Roam research, or others works well for one person, | but can't work for teams. | emptysongglass wrote: | > Confluence is used by tens of thousands of organizations | and they don't have a very good Sales strategy, that means | a lot of business choose them when they could have choose | something else. So I can't buy that it is terrible | everywhere. | | I don't believe the number of users in an enterprise | segment buying into a software is at all indicative of the | usefulness of a piece of software. Atlassian products are | typically sold between people who will not be the primary | users of that software. | | I have yet to see a SWE missing or desiring an Atlassian | product. GitHub and other SaaS products yes but never | Atlassian. | | I also disagree that evergreen notes aren't suitable for | teams. Notes that receive a lot of attention, or are high | touch, are by definition evergreen. We need more of these | in orgs but most of us don't know how to tend to our | companies digital gardens. A huge part of it is wordly | digital cruft akin to technical debt that accrues. As it | grows in size it compounds the problem of discoverability. | | Note-taking is a skill that receives precious little | attention, despite being so critical to knowledge work AKA | anything SWEs work with daily. | polote wrote: | At the end of the day, people need to be able to discover | notes if you want these to be useful. Just talking about | evergreen notes without offering a way to discover those | notes by anyone is useless. | emptysongglass wrote: | Here's where we agree! I'd love better discoverability | built in to these products. It'd be a huge boon, | personally, at my workplace (that uses Confluence :-(). | polote wrote: | That's where Roam Research has a point. Creating a graph | is appealing, as it is easier to browse and so discover | things. That's also how Wikipedia works. But Wikipedia | would never have worked without Google. | | In organizations the best thing to do imo is to have | everyone follow the same rules. Even bad rules that | everyone follow is better than everyone following its own | rules. And that's clearly one thing that Confluence sucks | at. But the rules can't either be the same for anyone | anywhere, so there is some balance to find. The other | area that can help discoverability is curation | | I would be happy to have a chat with you, don't hesitate | to reach out to paul at dokkument com | ssddanbrown wrote: | > Maybe BookStack can do fine for a company with a few dozens | of employees. But Confluence can handle tens of thousands of | employees. So I wouldn't label Bookstack as a Confluence | alternative. | | Sure, but there are a lot of people within that range up to | tens of thousands. I have had some people mention using | BookStack within environments towards to tens of thousands | (Although it's likely a lesser portion enganged). Just because | it may not achieve that one factor does not discount it as an | alternative for significant audience. | | > Maybe I'm missing something, but BookStack doesn't even have | a notion of "teams" only roles. You can't give permission of a | file to a user, only to all users who have a certain role. | | Yeah, we don't have the word usage of "Teams" but I'm not sure | what that'd offer in addition to roles. Role specific | permissions can be applied to any of the hierarchy elements | (Including upon page content). | polote wrote: | I'm certainly not criticizing BookStack. It actually looks | super responsive and have a great set of features to manage | knowledge especially for an open source platform. | | As for roles. In organizations of a certain size, the concept | of role is not organization wide, but team-wide. You will set | for example the editor role, for some people of the team | "Operations". Don't really see how this can be done on | BookStack | ssddanbrown wrote: | Okay, Not sure I still yet fully understand but I'm not | really familiar with Confluence so probably just something | in my blind spot. | | Good luck with dokkument! Hope you gain that large-scale | enterprise segment! | sirodoht wrote: | The only issue I have with many Confluence alternatives is that | they don't support multiple people editing the same document, at | the same time, a la google docs. Does this? I can't tell from the | landing page. | civilized wrote: | And Confluence supports collaborative editing. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Does not support this at the moment. Currently rebuilding the | editor with a vision to potentially support that in the future | although there'd be some hurdles to jump over to get to that | point. | hoherd wrote: | I just ran into this problem with Notion earlier this week. It | was really disappointing how bad the experience was with even | just two people trying to work on the same document. I quickly | gave up. | polote wrote: | All real Confluence alternative (Confluence is a b2b software | not a wiki tool) Notion, Guru, Slab, Slite ... are supporting | that since their creation. | tin7in wrote: | As someone else pointed out, creating a good real time | editing experience is tricky, especially if the editor is | block based. | | I would add Saga (https://saga.so) to the list of | alternatives. | KennyBlanken wrote: | It is extremely offputting that Saga doesn't show a single | actual product view, the site design makes me think the | product is equally ugly, and they require signing up to see | a demo? | | When a company hides the product that much and forces you | to only experience it with a tour guide, it's tacit | admission the product _sucks_. | tin7in wrote: | The hero section of the website is a demo recording of | the product. | ssddanbrown wrote: | I agree that it's frustrating when a company hides their | product, but I think the saga website design is really | nice and they do have an actual video of the platform | front and center (Instead of one of those fake simplified | "representations" that may companies use). | ssddanbrown wrote: | I've been working on BookStack for over 6 years now, learning a | lot about open source project maintainership during that time. | Originally developed it while looking for a documentation system | for my mixed-technical-skill workplace. Wanted something easy to | use without having to get finance involved when increasing our | user count. | | With Confluence backing away from their self-hosted offerings, | hopefully many will find BookStack useful. It's not supposed to | be a direct replacement, and the design & content structure is | quite opinionated, but it can serve many of the same use-cases as | Confluence had served. | tailspin2019 wrote: | This is superb. Thanks for making this. | | Looks like a good Notion alternative too. | maineldc wrote: | Thank you, thank you, thank you. I use started using bookstack | when I realized that I wanted a place for long form / long term | storage of documents separates from my Notes / To dos. I love | it and I deeply appreciate your hard work. | | For others that haven't tried it, here's what clicked for me: | - An opinionated hierarchy of Book -> Chapter (Optional) -> | Page - Great search - WYSIWYG OR Markdown supported | - Great integration into Diagrams.net | | I love it. Thank you, thank you, thank you. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Thank you! I love to hear about the specific features people | enjoy. | | > WYSIWYG OR Markdown | | I will state that switching between them is pretty flaky at | the moment, is done at instance level and can cause HTML in | markdown. Is designed to be choose-once-and-leave. That said, | in rebuilding the editor I am aiming for easy and instant | Markdown & WYSIWYG switching within editor. | tough wrote: | outline has a nice rich-markdown-text-editor package for | react based apps in case you can re-use it! | | I looked into the LaTeX support of it for a science editor | projectg | mjrpes wrote: | Have you looked at Toast UI Editor (MIT license)? | | https://ui.toast.com/tui-editor | | I checked out a bunch of text editors on a past project and | this one has worked very well as a WYSIWYG markdown editor. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Yeah, Got a list of potential options under review for | our required criteria: | https://github.com/BookStackApp/BookStack/issues/2738 | chrisweekly wrote: | Obsidian integration would make me (and likelya bunch of | its > 400k other users) happy! | 1cvmask wrote: | We could potentially add passwordless MFA from saas pass to | your project. Good luck with it. | philonoist wrote: | I apologize but may I know what you mean by "saas pass"? | yebyen wrote: | ssddanbrown wrote: | That's cool. I recently built MFA into the access flow, with | a sight to extend methods where needed, although any instance | using the SAML/LDAP/OIDC auth options could enforce MFA on | the identity provider side. | hardwaresofton wrote: | Bookstack looks like an amazing feat of engineering -- it's | overwhelmingly the wiki I want to deploy given other F/OSS | options. just today I was showing it to a friend and it is | impressive how clean and considered it is. Thanks for | maintaining and improving this project | ssddanbrown wrote: | Thank you! This kind of feedback means a lot, provides the | fuel to avoid burnout. | iambateman wrote: | I dove into your Laravel code the other day to see how you | organized things. | | Thanks for making it open so I could learn! | ssddanbrown wrote: | Happy to help! I will say that I would in no way present it | as an example of a clean codebase. 6 years of weekend and | night development, while having significant code | understanding/learning during that time, has lead to somewhat | of a mix of ideas and approaches. Constantly trying to re- | align things though! | iambateman wrote: | Totally makes sense! | | there's a lot to be learned in any event, since a lot of my | projects are night/weekend ones too. | bachmeier wrote: | Impressive that you've stuck to it for more than six years. I | remember testing an early version. Looks like you've made a lot | of improvements in that time. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Thanks! I've learnt a lot in that six years. I've been quite | proud of our constant, yet steady, pace of development while | retaining upgrade compatibility (where possible). | LeicaLatte wrote: | Book stack is very good. | solarkraft wrote: | I remember considering BookStack while looking for a (surprise) | replacement for Confluence. | | The main thing that led me to stop considering it pretty quickly | is precisely the concept of books - I find it both unnecessarily | complicated _and_ unnecessarily limiting. | | My Org now uses DokuWiki. It has _a lot_ of issues (the | prosemirror visual editor is a good start, but in beta and out of | development, for example). But it 's also the least sucking | option I've found. Most Wiki software severely screws up the | editing experience, which may not be such a good idea when you | want to get people to document things. I'm glad Bookstack does | this right. | INTPenis wrote: | As a former DokuWiki user (both pro and privately) the biggest | issue is when you want to migrate from DokuWiki. | | I managed to migrate my private docs from DokuWiki to markdown | but it wasn't easy and it took some manual editing. I'm much | happier knowing that it's in Markdown format simply because of | the options that opens up for me. | stevofolife wrote: | Nice work! What was the hardest technical and non technical part | of this? | ssddanbrown wrote: | > What was the hardest technical | | That's a tricky one to answer! The authentication systems most | likely, just because of the different standards and | configuration that different people demand. I've had to learn | LDAP, SAML2 and OIDC protocols to a level that allows me to | confidently add & maintain these systems. | | > non technical | | Probably issue handling & management, from a mental point of | view. Dealing with such a range of ideas and requests with an | ever-growing list of features/issues/support-request has been | tricky. I've had to learn to change my perspective and goals | when dealing with GitHub issues. | | In general the social side has been a massive point of learning | and challenge to me. I've recently written about many of these | more extensively here: | | https://www.reddit.com/r/opensource/comments/qrksgh/bookstac... | throwaway984393 wrote: | I can't say I would use BookStack. The demo doesn't show the same | sort of ease of use that Confluence has, nor the features. | | I really like Outline https://www.getoutline.com/ as it is open | source, self hosted and free if you don't use the Enterprise | features. It really does seem to be a Confluence replacement. | https://www.getoutline.com/compare/confluence-alternative | Ostrogodsky wrote: | Their price ranges left me scratching my head. | | 1-10 people: 10 USD/month | | 11-100 people: 79 USD/month | | 101-250 people: 249 USD/month | NmAmDa wrote: | You need to use slack or google for the selfhost setup. Which | is non starter for many people. | Aeolun wrote: | Yeah. I come across this once in a while, go yay, find out | about the auth requirements, and do a complete 180. | | I know I can't tell them how to build their product, but | really? | theelix wrote: | Personally I managed to run Outline using a standard OIDC | software like Keycloak. While more troublesome it should work | just fine without external tools | tommoor wrote: | Any OIDC compatible authentication provider works now, FWIW | CPLX wrote: | I've been looking for something just like this. Does it support | migration from Confluence? I glanced over the features section | and didn't see mention of that, but perhaps I missed it? | ssddanbrown wrote: | Unfortunately no readily available migration path from | Confluence. I'm not familiar enough with Confluence myself to | understand the formats and options that we'd need to carry | across & support. | | Our API [1] has recently matured to now support the different | content types so that could be utilised for such a migration | job although the API is still growing to cover more | actions/models. | | Have recently been thinking about possibly offering some form | of paid service support service to help the process and help | fund the project. | | [1] https://demo.bookstackapp.com/api/docs | Aeolun wrote: | Oh, prepare for some fun with ADF (atlassian document format) | if you ever do try to build migration from confluence. On the | positive side you'll have to deal with only one flavor, but I | swear they have like 10 different ways to present/format | their documents across all their products. | | Fortunately, a lot of the handling is open sourced in | atlaskit. | unixhero wrote: | Confluence import could be a premium feature you could offer. | unixhero wrote: | Great software. Use it a lot. Just wish it had backup and restore | within the web interface. | ssddanbrown wrote: | If it only had backup within the interface, would that cover | most of your wish? | | Reason being, I always have troubling thinking about backup AND | restore, but mostly because restore is a complicated mess | (Especially when you start thinking about going across | versions). Just achieving backup within the interface (Of | database and uploaded files) is much more feasible. | zekenie wrote: | It'd be awesome if this thing had mermaidjs support. It's native | in obsidian and it's such a game changer | ssddanbrown wrote: | This is something that has been requested before, although not | something I'd probably look to include in the core project | since I attempt to avoid custom formats and syntax where | possible. That said, I'd like to get to a point where something | like mermaid.js can easily be added if desired. Over the last | year the BookStack platform extensibility has grow | significantly (API, Webhooks, PHP Hooks, View/Language/Icon | Overries) and I'm looking to continue that to achieve such | requests without over-stressing the core project itself. | davidjgraph wrote: | In diagram under Arrange->Insert->Advanced (obviously). | anyfactor wrote: | I haven't used Confluence or BookStack in this case. Does these | platforms have git like version controlling and collaboration in | them? What about login and admin stuff? Also gitbased blog | platform like architecture perhaps? | | I am a big fan of journaling, documentation and having a | knowledge hub. I am not sure what is out there for a monolithic | yet shared and controllable knowledge hub. | toper-centage wrote: | There's is good versionimg in confluence, and also good search. | The editor is also nice (improved a lot since a few years ago). | Compared to the mess that is JIRA, I actually like confluence. | ssddanbrown wrote: | > Does these platforms have git like version controlling and | collaboration in them? | | BookStack does not have git-like versioning but content changes | are versioned within the database for rollback/compare/viewing. | | > What about login and admin stuff? | | BookStack has multiple authentication options (Including email | & password/LDAP/OIDC/SAML2) in addition to admin/user/role | controls. | CPLX wrote: | Another option I've been considering for a change away from | Confluence is Gitbook. Curious to hear if anyone has done an in- | depth comparison of these two. | ssddanbrown wrote: | This can really depend on your use-case and audience. | | Things like gitbook (& docusaurus) can often be better for | focused topics or when serving product documentation to users. | | BookStack tends to work better as a mixed-topic, mixed-user | platform. Along the lines of an internal wiki shared by | different teams. I've seen people attempt to use BookStack as a | replacement for GitBook but struggle due to the structure being | different. | shdisi wrote: | Thanks for creating and maintaining BookStack. My company has | used it for around three years, and recently integrated it with | Okta for SSO. It's fast, simple to use, and the recent search | improvements have really made it an excellent product. | tailspin2019 wrote: | Out of interest, does your company support the author via | sponsorship or other means? | | I'm curious... I wondered what the red tape is like in | organisations that use open source projects like this in order | to setup a GitHub sponsorship or similar. | | In a previous role at a cash-strapped startup I used open | source software within my team and have to admit I never | arranged any contributions to the OSS projects - though if I | had my time again in that role I'd be more mindful about trying | to do this. Especially I think when the project is a very small | or "one person" team. | ssddanbrown wrote: | I recently come across a similar question on Reddit. While I | can't offer the company perspective I can offer a maintainer | perspective: | | https://www.reddit.com/r/opensource/comments/rwmiwn/recommen. | ..? | tailspin2019 wrote: | Great comment and very interesting to read your perspective | on it. | | Really if we're honest, any company using Bookstack should | be able to afford to chuck you $20/month or something | (barring perhaps one-person bootstrapped startups). It's | likely red tape, bureaucracy and the internal culture that | prevents this more than financial means. | | And especially so if support demands are being made of you! | robjan wrote: | It's easier if you create some value added service like | "premium support" or an Active Directory integration | plugin then charge for that. | Aeolun wrote: | Yeah. The reason we're running a lot of our own open | source stacks is that getting anything officially | approved has to go through multiple layers of bureaucracy | and approvals. | | Getting approval to throw an open source project some | money is likely to be even crazier (probably not a | concept they ever imagined). | ssddanbrown wrote: | Awesome to hear. Especially happy to hear good feedback | regarding the search improvements, I spent a good amount of | time on those and this is the first feedback I've had since. | jethro_tell wrote: | This looks really good. I've been looking for a good wiki | solution. Gonna give this a try in the next few weeks. | bogwog wrote: | As someone who hasn't used Confluence, how is this different from | a regular wiki (e.g. MediaWiki)? | grogenaut wrote: | Wysiwyg editor, integrations with Jira queries and other tools | via UI wizards/widgets. | bawolff wrote: | Mediawiki has had a wysiwyg editor for a while now | qbasic_forever wrote: | More focused on writing explicit long-form content organized | into book-like trees (i.e. book -> chapter -> page), instead of | doing things TheWikiWay. It's much nicer for technical | documentation IMHO. | throw0101a wrote: | Can anyone with experience with multiple wiki platforms compare | this with XWiki and/or MediaWiki. | | I may be asked to update $WORK's wiki, which is currently | MoinMoin (IIRC), and am looking for anyone with more experience | so I don't have to start testing from scratch. I've run MediaWiki | before, but am not beholden to using it just because of | past/current familiarity. | | Importing from MoinMoin would be nice, but not absolutely | required. LDAP integration (at least for authentication/LDAP | binds) is mandatory, but LDAP group integration | (authorization/permissions/roles) isn't mandatory: that can be | internal to the app. Wouldn't mind it though: either Unix-style | or AD-style (memberOf). | KennyBlanken wrote: | Mediawiki is page focused, needing a lot of tweaking to make it | act like something other than a completely open public page | editor. Trying to collect pages is annoying ugly; about the | best you can do is with "categories." Mediawiki tries to do too | much with document metatags and whatnot. Mediawiki is | ugly/outdated looking (IMHO) and requires lots of php config | file editing. | | Bookstack has a lot more inherent document organization stuff | (ie: books>chapters>pages etc), it's easy as hell to | administer, and it looks gorgeous out of the box. | RheingoldRiver wrote: | > Trying to collect pages is annoying ugly; about the best | you can do is with "categories." | | With vanilla mediawiki, sure. If you use Cargo or SMW, you | can do pretty much anything you want, especially with Cargo. | Add in Lua (Scribunto extension) and you have effectively a | full extra layer in your stack. | | (There's also DPL (Dynamic Page List extension) as an option; | if what you're doing is easy enough to express, and you're | just trying to build lists of pages, you may be able to get | away with just doing DPL queries and nothing else beyond | that.) | | It might be more technically complex than you want it to be, | but it's definitely not limited to categories. | trynewideas wrote: | I enjoy Cargo and DPL, they're powerful and great tools for | automatically aggregating and filtering content, and I used | both of them a lot at a MW that I was an admin on for | several years. But it still isn't easy to build an ordered, | hierarchical, book-like structure with book-like output, | which was a constant request. It wasn't just technically | complex (no users wanted to learn how to do it, they wanted | one person to do it for them), it also didn't do the one | thing most people wanted it to do. | | The Collection extension did that, though, but Wikimedia's | weird behavior around it and their multiple failed attempts | at choosing a tech stack for output -- OCG/ZIM, | PoD/PediaPress, Electron (not that one)/Proton -- much less | the next step of building that functionality into a usable | feature in MW, turned me off from trying. | | I need to dig into BookStack (I imagine like most wiki | flavors, it'll lack the templating features in MW that I | rely on), but the fact that it's built on the book/chapter | paradigm from the ground up instantly catches my eye. | jraph wrote: | Future XWiki employee (should start in March!). Feel free to | reach out to XWiki [1] [2], they'll be happy to answer your | question and address your specific needs. They are nice. Feel | free to contact me if you'd prefer but I'll be less competent | than them for obvious reasons. | | I don't know many things about XWiki yet, but the main | difference between MediaWiki and XWiki is probably the X in | XWiki (eXtensible). XWiki is more like a development platform | to build a website, a blog, or a collaborative platform | (internal or public) that you can tailor to your needs. What | you put as contents is highly customizable / scriptable and | several Wiki syntaxes are supported. The XWiki syntax can be | extended to support your custom features if needed. There are a | lot of apps [3] to extend XWiki (some are paid, but open source | anyway so you can compile them yourself). LDAP is supported. | XWiki will also provide support or specific developments if | needed. | | MediaWiki is developed for Wikipedia first. That's what you can | read on XWiki's website anyway. But if you don't need anything | that MediaWiki doesn't already provide and like its UX, it | can't be a wrong decision to go for it. Many people outside | Wikimedia use it and the UX is familiar to _everybody_ , and | that's huge. Both tools can be self hosted (and MediaWiki is | quite easy to install), MediaWiki is mostly in PHP, XWiki is in | Java. XWiki can be hosted for you by XWiki SAS. They'll also | help handle migrations from Confluence and are currently | handling a lot of them, and I'm sure they will be interested by | hearing about migrations from other tools too. | | I guess WikiMatrix would be a good starting point [4]. XWiki | also have comparisons to common collaborative platforms on | their websites including MediaWiki. They are obviously biased, | but don't lie neither. You might want to check them out. | | I hadn't encountered Bookstack, before. The UI seems quite | clean. I hope we'll have the pleasure to meet and discuss at | some point! The UK is not far, we are neighbors. Hmm, | neighbours! | | edit: by the way, you might be interested by XWiki's online | presentation at FOSDEM on the 5th of February [5], as well as | any other presentation in the collaboration and content | management devroom, because not everything collaboration is a | wiki :-) [6] | | [1] https://www.xwiki.org/ | | [2] https://www.xwiki.com/ | | [3] https://xwiki.com/en/offerings/products/business-apps | | [4] | https://www.wikimatrix.org/compare/moinmoin+mediawiki+xwiki+... | | [5] https://fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/collabxwiki/ | | [6] | https://fosdem.org/2022/schedule/track/collaboration_and_con... | zozbot234 wrote: | There is a "semantic" extension to MediaWiki that makes it | easier to support many enterprise use cases with data | visualizations, custom queries (potentially referencing | information from multiple wiki pages) and the like. It is | somewhat widely used for wikis other than Wikipedia, that can | simply defer to the Wikidata project for those needs. | RheingoldRiver wrote: | SMW works okay but if you have technical ability, I'd | recommend Cargo | (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Cargo) instead. | It's a somewhat limited SQL wrapper (limited - e.g. | subqueries aren't supported, which can be annoying on | occasion but tbh I've only missed them maybe 3 or 4 times, | wiki queries tend not to be too complicated) which is | roughly equivalent to SMW in maybe 50% of use cases I've | encountered, inferior in maybe 2%, and significantly better | in the rest. | | It definitely has a bit of a higher learning curve than | SMW, especially for non-developers, and even for developers | there's some kinda weird stuff going on with it (e.g. they | have this HOLDS syntax sugar and list-type fields as an | answer to SMW's ability to express one-to-many relations a | bit more naturally than sql can; also there's this | cargo_attach parser function that I forget to do 80% of the | time and that's why my tables don't rebuild properly). | | Anyway if anyone does use MediaWiki and is choosing between | these extensions I'm happy to talk to you about them, this | is what I do for my job & I have several years experience | with both (though my SMW experience is somewhat outdated, | since I switched to Cargo several years ago, and only | recently have started using SMW again, and that only | tangentially). | jraph wrote: | I didn't know! Linking for whoever would like to look into | this. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki | dvdkon wrote: | I'm currently helping set up a wiki for students of a STEM | faculty, and we've settled on MoinMoin (v2, that is). We're | broadly building on a previous MediaWiki setup, which we've | found to be too "Wikipedia-oriented". | | I've looked at a few very extensible and featureful wikis | (XWiki, Tiki Wiki, TWiki, Foswiki), but for our usecase, they | seemed overwhelmingly big (I know, I'm not easy to please). | They're all almost application development/scripting platforms, | which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it would mean we'd | have to learn a lot more if we wanted to modify parts of them. | Of the four mentioned, XWiki looked like the most "polished", | its conceptual model and code looked maintainable and it has a | great number of actively developed plugins. If I'm not mistaken | it even allows writing pages in Markdown, which was one of our | criteria. | | I also looked into taking a very lightweight wiki (LOC in the | high thousands) and adapting it to our needs, but found that | most of those didn't have a code model that would lend itself | well to doing things like swapping out a custom format for | Markdown, we'd basically be rewriting half the wiki at that | point. Even DokuWiki, a relatively large project, is too blase | about running regexes on page contents for my taste. | | We looked into BookStack, but didn't think its content model | would work too well for our idea of a wiki as a "social" site. | Maybe it's just the terminology, though. | | In the end, we ended up running MoinMoin 2. It's in a perpetual | beta state, but it _is_ actively maintained. The main reason | was its code quality: It 's small enough that understanding how | it all fits together is quick, and it's structured so that | adding functionality or swapping out one part of it is easy (as | much as it could be for software that's over a decade old, | anyway). We're programmers anyway, so we decided to go with the | ability to change the wiki to our liking over initial polish. | So far, I've made a new theme, wrote a script for migrating | from MediaWiki, changed out the Markdown parser and added SSO | with CAS. The changes aren't public yet, but will be soon. | | So far I'm happy with our decision, but note that my search was | heavily subjective, you very likely have other requirements and | preferences. | | EDIT: By the way, the criteria were loosely: | | - Modifiability (I wanted a custom theme, needed a non- | traditional SSO option and could see us getting ambitious about | custom functionality) | | - Hierarchy + ideally tags for organising | | - Ability to export some pages into a print version (annually | published leaflet/book for new students) | | - Permission system (which we hopefully won't need to use) | | - Storing pages in Markdown (helps with converting for print | too) | | - Macros (I'm a fan, easy-to-write extensions would be just | fine) | annoyingnoob wrote: | This looks really nice. | | Atlassian did not consider small businesses with regulatory | requirements when it decided to push everyone to the cloud. | Atlassian's cloud cannot ever meet my regulatory requirements, by | 2024 I need to replace Confluence. There is no way I can pay for | the cost of the Data Center version of Confluence you'll be able | to self-host, over $20K/year to self-host Confluence is a non- | starter. | | Does BookStack index uploaded files for search? If so, what | formats does it support? | | Can pages (or books) be exported in common formats? | | Any plans to support Postgres in the future? | ssddanbrown wrote: | > Does BookStack index uploaded files for search? If so, what | formats does it support? | | No, unfortunately not. You can attach files but we only support | indexing (And parsing) of core page content. Indexing other | formats opens up a large branch of maintenance while adding | potential confusion in the platform in regards to what's | considered content. | | > Can pages (or books) be exported in common formats? | | Yeah, Both can be exported as plaintext, markdown, contained- | html or PDF. The PDF export can be troublesome but works for | most simple use-cases. | | > Any plans to support Postgres in the future? | | Not in sight for the near future. I'm not closed off to it but | there are questions of support and maintainership. My detailed | thoughts on additional database support can be found here: | https://github.com/BookStackApp/BookStack/issues/76#issuecom... | tommica wrote: | Such a nice tool - we use it at work, and the people managing | like how simple it us to use! | npsomaratna wrote: | Same here. Simple, focused, and easily usable by non-tech | people. We adopted Bookstack several years ago, and we've never | looked back. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Great to hear it's been used to some longer term success! | ssddanbrown wrote: | That's great to hear, usability has been at the forefront of | it's design and development. | drcursor wrote: | A killer feature would be confluence import. | | How do the permissions work ? Same way as confluence (inherited) | ? | ssddanbrown wrote: | Sure, See my other comment here in regards to import/migration: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29852265 | | I'm not sure how Confluence permissions work. Within BookStack | pages (Main content) is generally within a hierarchy of Shelves | > Books > Chapters > Pages. Both shelves and chapters are | optional parts of the hierarchy,and Books can be members of | multiple shelves. | | General permissions (Edit/Create/Delete) can be controlled per- | role, and multiple roles can be assigned to a user. Permissions | can then be overridden per hierarchy item. Permissions for | Books and Chapters will cascade to child items unless they're | overridden. | ulnarkressty wrote: | Had a look around, this looks really polished. I would have one | remark - please consider making tables a first-class feature. | | In my experience with Confluence, the easiest and most | comprehensive way to organize information is with tables. Having | a quick way to merge, delete, color cells would be great. Right | now, coloring and merging are hidden away in some menus, and | deleting cells will shift the bottom toolbar with the table | upwards, so you can't do it quickly. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Yeah, Tables are a challenge in general. The trouble with them | from an editor perspective is the range of desired options and | control (Many each at table, row, cell level) is fairly vast. | | I'm currently in the process of building a new content editor | which I'm hoping would provide better opportunities to make | such controls more intuitive. | ulnarkressty wrote: | It doesn't need to be Word or Excel-levels of options and | control, less is actually more - for example table cells in | Confluence can only have 6 colors, and no fancy border styles | etc. which in my opinion provides a more unified look and | feel. Just the UX needs to flow smoothly enough, as working | with tabular data consists of doing many of the same steps | over and over again. | [deleted] | slickdork wrote: | I've been using this as a personal wiki for a few years now. | Thank you so much for making it! I really love it. | ssddanbrown wrote: | No problem, thanks for the positive message! | eyeball wrote: | My company is forcing a migration from confluence to sharepoint. | What a nightmare. | pSYoniK wrote: | Really enjoy your project! Setting it up on a free Oracle cloud | VPS is very straightforward, setting up automated backups is also | very easy and restoring is again, very very easy! Thank you for | your hard work on this project, it made me start working on my | own take on how notes should be handled and it gave me a place to | keep things that I find interesting and keep notes on everything | I learned throughout uni over the past couple of years. | | Thanks again, your work is really appreciated! | ssddanbrown wrote: | Thanks! Interesting to hear about the backups and restore being | easy, I often hear complaints due to not having in-app | backup/restore but the risk of causing issues, over doing that | at an infrastructure level (Via mysqldump/file-copies), has | always been a point of worry for me when thinking down the in- | app route. | bloggie wrote: | I came across your software a few weeks ago when I was looking | for some kind of locally hosted collaborative documentation suite | for internal use, basically, a wiki that can be used by people | who aren't programmers. I was a bit incredulous when I found that | it is basically expected to use markdown if you want to have a | wiki. This really raises the barrier to entry and restricts users | to ones that are technically proficient and have the time to | learn and deal with markdown. Wysiwyg is a necessity. | | Easy content insertion is also necessary. We haven't yet | integrated bookstack, but I don't see any alternatives (sticking | with the locally hosted requirement) | wwarek wrote: | Not sure if this fully fits your needs but you might want to | look at Wiki.js. You can self host it, has WYSIWYG editor | available (as well as HTML and markdown). I'm not associated, | just use it for some time. | | https://js.wiki/ | Vaslo wrote: | Agree - I self host wiki.js and love it. Easy to figure out. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Yeah, wiki.js is in the same space and seems to be pretty | great. BookStack and wiki.js have taken quite different | design & structure choices though so I usually advise trying | out the demos of both to see what best fits. | ei8ths wrote: | one of the things we use confluence for is tagging people to | tasks. putting pages underneath pages and when things are checked | off they show up on the parent page so employees have all tasks | and then the meeting tasks, then plus all the wiki features but | the above was what sold us on confluence for doing meetings and | minutes. I haven't been able to find something similar. | fnord123 wrote: | Sorry this is nothing like Confluence. On Bookstack you click a | link and get a new page instantly. This is nothing like | Confluence where you need to wait 5-8 seconds for each page. | | And no, I will never not shit in Atlassian products until they | fix performance. Trello is the standout. Thanks for not trashing | it. | [deleted] | ssddanbrown wrote: | I hear this a lot from people switching from Confluence. I | watched a colleague using Confluence once and was surprised how | much time was spent looking at those text-placeholder blocks | while content was presumably loading in the background. | vladvasiliu wrote: | My favorite is when elements jump around while they load, so | you're guaranteed to misclick on links. So then you'll have | to wait again (when going back), because of course the cache | hasn't been invented yet. | jraph wrote: | this reminds me of Bitbucket... | IceWreck wrote: | I used to use Dokuwiki as my personal notes app/knowledgebase | pretty heavily. Switched to Bookstack two years ago and never | looked back. It has everything you need in a Wiki, no third party | plugins needed like Dokuwiki. | | The API is excellent, and I've used it to build some custom | stuff. They recently added webhooks too. | | And Dan is pretty responsive on Discord if you need help. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Thanks for the kind words! Always nice to hear happy feedback | regarding the API, good to know it's getting some use. | solarkraft wrote: | Huh, so that's why the last update of Argon was 2 years ago :-) | | Thanks for making it! I consider it to be the best theme | available for DokuWiki and my organization uses a forked | version of it (https://github.com/fablab-luenen/dokuwiki- | krypton). | amiga-workbench wrote: | I've been planning on rolling this out at work for months now, | just finished setting up a little server for the office to host | it on. Its going to help so much. | ssddanbrown wrote: | That's great, hope it works out well for you! | rob001 wrote: | How does this compare to wikijs? This looks very good, but I'm | already very happy with wikijs. | ssddanbrown wrote: | If you're happy with wikijs I'd advise that you probably stay | on it to be honest. WikiJS is a great project. They two differ | quite a bit in design and structure, if wikijs's structure | works well for you already you may find yourself fighting | against the BookStack structure/layout. Can always give the | demo [1] a go to get an idea. | | [1] https://demo.bookstackapp.com/ | tgv wrote: | Impressive. I'm definitely going to give this a look. Right now, | we've got our technical docs in Sharepoint (yeah, that | Sharepoint), mixing its built-in docs and Word docs, and I'd | really like to get rid of that. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Thanks! My original scenario was a mix of gist code snippets | and word docs. The horror is when those word docs are version | by file name (server_docs_final-v2.docx). It definitely helps | to get things aligned into a platform that people understand | how to use. | Sheen96 wrote: | Glad to see any alternatives to confluence (or Atlassian in | general). I've used Confluence for a good 4 years or so and for | the life of me, I can not fathom why anyone would use this for | storing documentation for code etc, as opposed to storing things | direct in a repo. I can understand it's use somewhat for business | folks, but even then, the way of organising things is abysmal, | every solution (such as rich text editing) feels very off the | shelf/MVP, uninspiring UI, the list goes on. It feels like most | companies that use it already use the Atlassian stack of | JIRA/Bitbucket, then feel the need to tack Confluence onto the | end because it's there. | leokennis wrote: | I think Confluence "shines" as a sort of "Wikipedia for your | company" with the added benefit that it's simple enough that | anyone can create a nice looking page and there are plugins to | cater to different disciplines. | | And yes, it's super bland and uninspiring. Just like Excel or | Word. I consider it a feature. | bitschubser_ wrote: | In my old (and soon current again) shop we used confluence | extensively, to get the best from both worlds we usually kept | the documentation next to the code in markdown or asciidoc | files and synchronized them to confluence in a CI/CD pipeline | (confluence was read only for these sections) maybe I can open | source these helpers when I'm back... a two way merge was also | in the making :). we could sync whole file trees with automatic | link crosslink generation, asset management and versioning | support in confluence | polote wrote: | In my opinion this is the way to go, documentation close to | the code but still indexed in a real knowledge management | tool. That's one thing that we are building at Dokkument, but | I would be really interested to know more about what you have | done, especially how those files are then indexed on | Confluence | pm90 wrote: | > It feels like most companies that use it already use the | Atlassian stack of JIRA/Bitbucket, then feel the need to tack | Confluence onto the end because it's there. | | Literally the only reason it exists. JIRA is the hook that gets | companies on to the rest of the horrible Atlassian stack. | kyriakos wrote: | As if jira itself is not horrible. But to be fair to jira I | recently tried the cloud version which is untouched by any | scrum masters or management and its way better than what I | have to endure in my day job with hundreds of customizations | it has received over the years to shoehorn every kind of | metric | mgkimsal wrote: | I always found the ability to draft confluence docs then create | jira tickets from within confluence to be the 'obvious' use | case, but I don't often see people do it. Or... I've seen some | orgs do it a lot, and some not at all (even when they have both | jira and confluence together). | | Size of org/team is probably a factor, but the linking between | the two products is one of the few things I see it has that | most other tools don't. It's probably because most other tools | are single-use, and they focus on one or the other, but not | both sides. | polote wrote: | > I can not fathom why anyone would use this for storing | documentation for code etc, as opposed to storing things direct | in a repo. | | Because storing documentation in repos doesn't work great when | you want to organize your documentation, discover or search it. | | Having thousands of documentation files in a repo, next to the | code is unmanageable, much more than thousands of documentation | files in Confluence. In Confluence, you can put rights, tags, | titles, organize in folders, assign owners, put comments, .... | | Is Confluence good at it ? Not much, but it doesn't mean we | should remove Confluence. | dont__panic wrote: | Confluence is a fantastic way to ensure that nobody ever | finds your documentation. The WYSIWYG editor is so painfully | slow, buggy, and laggy, it actually reduces the chance of | anybody bothering to update documentation. When organizations | change names, URLs change completely and you can sometimes | never find a linked page again after it moves. Navigation in | confluence is painfully slow, even though it's a bunch of | static text. Embedding code snippets or images is an exercise | in frustration. | | It's a problem. | solarkraft wrote: | Confluence sucks! But it does have one of the best editing | experiences I've seen (it also sucks, but less than the | rest). You can privately draft pages before publishing | them, get diffs of versions, it auto-saves and you even get | real time collaboration with others. That's worth a lot, | imo. | kyriakos wrote: | Agree about no one finding your documents. I have trouble | finding my own documents in it, don't expect others to be | able to find them. Unless you are absolutely obsessive | about organisation and linking documents things remain a | disjointed mess, would have been cleaner to store markdown | in the file system in a directory tree than in confluence. | polote wrote: | I mean, I know. I've wrote an article called "We deserve | better than Notion and Confluence" and I spend my days | building an alternative to Confluence for orgz. | | But I still think that Confluence is better than nothing | bbkane wrote: | There are a couple reasons I prefer docs in Confluence to docs | in repo: - I can update the docs without going through Git | peer-review (admittedly this is a culture issue, not a | technical one). - We have "code-tangential" docs already in | Confluence and it's nice to have one place to search - Non-devs | (like lawyers) find Confluence more familiar | | I've taken to putting a link to the Confluence docs in the | README so folks who find the code first can easily find the | docs. | mgkimsal wrote: | > I've taken to putting a link to the Confluence docs | | Middle ground I've found on some projects: very detailed | code/data-oriented notes are in markdown in the repo, tied to | a PR. Those doc files may reference external items like | confluence pages or specific tracking ticket/URLs that relate | to the code at hand. | | I was on a team that had _everything_ in confluence, and | everything was impossible to find. The closest I came to | understanding it was the confluence docs were always initial | plans, but were rarely updated. When updated, you wouldn 't | necessarily know if you needed to look through 5 versions to | see earlier thinking, or which links to 'updates' confluence | pages you needed to trawl through. It was as much a problem | of a growing set of contributors and growing departments than | anything else, but there was a new 'direction' every 6-9 | months (when new folks would come in) and "this worked at my | old company" so they'd document stuff however they wanted. | | No one on the dev team bothered to ever look there for | anything, because it was simply pointless. Few people ever | looked at it for anything more than "recent updates" to see | what's changed in the last 2-3 weeks. Discoverability on the | size of that project (and this is 'only' 5 years old ~80 | people) was just useless. | | A handful of folks _did_ keep 'onboarding' stuff relatively | up to date, but it was less than a year old at that point. I | suspect that if those folks moved on, those docs may slowly | rot. | | On the whole, keep written docs both updated and useful and | findable to a growing number of people with disparate needs | and different contexts and backgrounds... it's a lot harder | than it might seem when first considering it. Even if you | have the people on a team with the aptitude for it, it's | usually low priority in every work cycle, and the first | casualty when trying to hit deadlines. | ukasiu wrote: | Even simpler Markdown-based: https://www.getoutline.com/ | ssddanbrown wrote: | I'd say that simplicity can very much depend on audience, use- | case and opinion. The design and content structure between | platforms appears quite different. | | BookStack does support Markdown content editing although it is | WYSIWYG or Markdown, jumping between the two isn't really | supported (Yet, Hoping to achieve this later this year). | pkz wrote: | One of the benefits of Counfluence is that it is one of the | only Wikis where I've seen non-technical people being able to | create content on a daily basis. Linking pages, inserting | graphs and images just works. I have yet to see that in | anything based on markdown. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Yeah, non-technical folk were one of my key audiences for | BookStack which most other popular open-source offerings, at | the time, seemed to lack focus for. People do love their | markdown input though. | | I'm currently rebuilding the editor; My goal is it have an | easy WYSIWYG editor that allows instance back-and-forth | switching to Markdown. One of the tricker parts is avoiding | obscure/custom markdown syntax for non-common/custom content | blocks, as one of my main principals is to ensure user | content is portable/non-proprietary. | tommoor wrote: | Outline's editor is similar to Dropbox Paper, Markdown | shortcuts work but knowing Markdown isn't a requirement to | use it | [deleted] | robsalasco wrote: | Would be nice if they can offer a managed version in the near | future | KennyBlanken wrote: | The whole point is that it is super easy to get going. | | I cut and paste the docker compose file, tweaked a few things, | and hit the go button. Done. | ssddanbrown wrote: | Yeah, this has been requested a few times. I don't come from a | hosting background (Outside of managing my own VPSs) so I don't | feel it's something I can personally do (at a level of service | I'd be happy with) but the idea of partnering with someone that | has experience is something I've though about; The tricky part | is finding someone I can trust enough to send users to. | nwilkens wrote: | I'd love to chat more about this! | | We're a managed cloud infrastructure business (since 2006), | and also run our own public cloud.. Reach out to me via nick | at mnx io. | | At a minimum, I'd be happy to give you some pointers in this | space. | satyamkapoor wrote: | Would love to help get this up. :) | siculars wrote: | ^ This right here is a business ^ | | Helping small ISVs turn their software into SaaS offerings. | ssddanbrown wrote: | For sure. Honestly, I would love to have an established | open-source respecting company like RedHat come along and | say "We'll be your official hosting partner, we'll handle | hosting, payments and offer these services, we'll need x | hours from you per week for support, otherwise focus on the | project, we'll give you PSx per month, You retain ownership | and other revenue streams." | | A bit idealist and of course the contract would be more | complicated, but to focus on the project while having | established support would be ideal. | rgj wrote: | I sent you a message via LinkedIn, I would love to partner | with you on this. | davidjgraph wrote: | I think this isn't a good strategy for the project, at a | commercial level. They currently have a well define niche. | Competing in a much larger market without a clear competitive | advantage won't work. | ecshafer wrote: | This looks like a great piece of software. I was never a fan of | Confluence, but that is more that Confluence, I feel is | backwards. Since confluence, the few opinions is has, is reverse. | You typically get some kind of set up like Confluence Space is | owned by a person, who then adds approved editors. The default | should be open editing, then locking down to specific people. | What typically seems to happen in confluence shops is that | information ends up being organized by _TEAMS_ not by topic. | Which is a terrible way to document. This idea of Books - > Pages | seems to be more opinionated that would hopefully get people to | not make this mistake. | polote wrote: | > What typically seems to happen in confluence shops is that | information ends up being organized by TEAMS not by topic | | It is usually a better idea to organize information by teams | than topics in an organization. The reason is that if the tree | structure is unknown to most people, they will not be able to | find information easily nor to choose the right place to create | information. | | You shouldn't expect everyone to browse the whole documentation | to understand how it is structured in order to be able to use | it | Too wrote: | Used confluence in several shops and never seen anything like | that happen. Sounds terrible. Spaces are usually few and edit | for all. Must have been bad admins and management. | | Doesn't mean it's a good product though. Especially the cloud | version is progressively worse, especially with regards to | performance. Glad to see some competition in the area. | punnerud wrote: | Should also check out MediaWiki. The last year the visual editor | is finally included with PHP, making the installation simple: | https://mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki | unixhero wrote: | No not really any point in also checking out MediaWiki. | Bookstack has surpassed MediaWiki in usability by leaps and | bounds. They are not even comparable any more, aside from being | able to do wiki edits they are separate use cases by now. | KennyBlanken wrote: | 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 wrote: | > 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 wrote: | > 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] | r_hoods_ghost wrote: | This looks great! One thing which would be useful would be an | approver role or step for document creation and updating. In a | lot of orgs it's necessary to have someone sign off on changes to | sop's ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-01-08 23:00 UTC)