Home / server / Questions / 62668
Accepted
shaiss
Asked: 2009-09-06 00:18:45 +0800 CST

Tikiwiki or FosWiki?

  • 772

So I've gone through all the features link text and can't decide between the two. I prefer foswiki to support the community and because I dont like tWiki's ideaology.

However foswiki uses flat files and not a db. We are a small company with 25 users. I don't forsee a huge use from the wiki.

So should I be concered about foswiki using flat files?

wiki

6 Answers

  1. Best Answer

    I think having flat files instead of database is a benefit not a hazard :). Flat files are more portable and easy to manage. I've used dokuwiki, which is based on directory structure and files and lets me to easily export to local or to navigate through the files to make batch changes.

    • 3

  2. Foswiki and twiki are basically the same: foswiki is a fork off twiki after the twiki company tried to do odd stuff.

    Seems like almost all contributors went to foswiki.

    Since the file format is the same, it is also easy to switch if needed. After the fork, I went from twiki to foswiki, and did not regret that step.

    "Twiki governance scandal, during 2008": http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Blog/BlogEntry200810x9#BlogPosts -- leading to this: http://foswiki.org/About/WhyThisFork?redirectedfrom=Home.WhyThisFork

    • 2

  3. The link you gave is comparing Foswiki and Tiki (no W) not TWiki. If you compare TWiki and Foswiki you'll see they both use text files / RCS. If you click the Hide features that are equal in every Wiki link at the top of the page you'll see that there's very little difference between the two.

    As someone that used to contribute to the TWiki project it seems to me that virtually all the core contributors went to Foswiki when it forked, and it's Foswiki that's got the most momentum at the moment.

    • 1

  4. Well as long as the application has the features you want, go for it :)
    Moreso if you think that it will not have to handle a lot of data..

    • 0

  5. TWiki (certainly used to) uses RCS for it's revision support, but is based on flat files too. Given they appear to use the same backend, go for which ever provides the nicest formatting and features. You seem to perfer foswiki, so go for that.

    • 0

  6. I wasted 2 days trying to get TWiki working on windows before I discovered Foswiki. 10 minutes later I was up and running and creating content. TWiki was easy enough to get working on linux but their windows support is definitely an after-thought.

    • 0