In my wiki roundup post I complained about DokuWiki’s reliance on plugins, but after scouring the landscape of FOSS wiki offerings nothing else offers exactly what I need. So I settled on DokuWiki with a bunch of plugins. I have plugins for tagging pages, moving pages, blogging (which I use as a place to quickly catch ideas as they come to me before pushing them to the wiki proper), listing orphaned and wanted pages, among others.
The reason I initially disliked the idea of relying on plugins are that they may interfere with one another, interacting with the different plugins is inconsistent, and updating and management become more complex. But like I said, they get me what I need.
On the other hand, I’ve also been working with BookStack for another project. In many ways it’s the opposite of DokuWiki. It looks modern, it has a noob-friendly wysiwyg editor (important when you need people of different technical skill levels to use it), and tries to be “batteries included” in the dev’s words. The problem it’s missing some features I consider essential for a wiki, chief of which is the ability to link to nonexistent pages. There isn’t really a centralized way to manage uploads, either. And since it isn’t extensible, you’re stuck with those features unless the dev decides to add them later.
So I can see why people may prefer one approach over the other, but how about you?
I do most my work on the terminal so I prefer something in the middle: convention over configuration, most functionality included but rather small by default. More complex needs can be compiled in.
Related: I wish more Linux distributions’ package managers would allow for binary installation alongside source compiled packages. In FreeBSD I’m amazed at how well
pkg’ binary packages play with ports-compiled ones.Since I am a fan of blender I most likely have to vote for the first one. However it was kind of a blessing when many of the features that had to be installed as add-ons before now is a part of the plain software. They tend to implement all of the very popular ones, as a part of the standard program. I think people would lie if they didn’t love everything working right out of the box, so we don’t have to spend time on configuration and more time on actually creating.
This sounds like a very sane bit of both approach.
Support plugins so anyone can extend however they like, but integrate the most popular plugins into the software.
I like it.
I really like software that is from plugins but it needs to have some stable ‘core’ plugins shipped by default, like emacs for example. Nothing by default is pretty useless but it all depends on constraints and requirements.
If I have enough time to customize it and configure it, barebones with plugins/extensions. If it’s softwar that I need to start using ASAP and getting results, all-in-one
I don’t have a real preference, but one more advantage to the plugin route is that if you need something that’s not available, cobbling together a plugin is much simpler than modify most projects directly.
I recently spent a lot of time doing this with Odoo and I was very grateful for the modularity.
By the way, in case you haven’t found it, there is a pretty decent wysiwyg editor plugin for DokuWiki. I use it at work and it’s been pretty simple for my users.
Multiple separate software vertically tuned to work perfectly out of the box for the single thing they are meant to do 🤣
