use Perl

Perl Beginners' Site News and Activity

posted by hfb on 2004.02.07 5:09   

Shlomi Fish writes "Since its inception 10 months ago, the Perl Beginner's Site has been heavily improved and embellished. A lot of content was added, and there's now a new color scheme that is hopefully easier on the eye. Even more importantly, its source code is now present in its own public Subversion repository, which should facilitate contributions.

Not all is well, and the site has some issues. We could use more book reviews and more links. The Wiki is based on an implementation which is a non-portable JavaScript hell and unreliable. (We are planning to switch to TWiki or something else soon). Finally, it is posssible that the site's design is too conventional and unattractive and as such could use a re-structuring of the page. Several people have contributed ideas and links until now, and so We are Waiting for Your Contribution<tm>.

You can help in several ways. Finally, the site is a very good one even now, but could use more publicity. By spreading the word, or linking to it or to one of its pages, you can help making it even more popular.

Let's make Perl-begin even better than it already is!"

• What's wrong with CGI::Kwiki (Score:3, Informative)

  by ajt (2546) on 2004.02.08 5:21 (#28183) Homepage Journal

  There are plenty of modern, modular and excellent Perl based wikis to choose from. If you want a fully featured model look at CGI::Wiki, if you want something simpler then CGI::Kwiki [kwiki.org] is an excellent choice.

  There are plenty of examples of both. I believe the OpenGuides [openguides.org] run on CGI::Wiki, and for CGI::Kwiki look at YAPC::Belfast [yapc.org] and LondonGeek [londongeek.org].

  --
  -- "It's not magic, it's work..."

  Reply to This

  • Re:What's wrong with CGI::Kwiki (Score:2)

    by nicholas (3034)

    And if space is at a real premium, there are plenty of tiny but fully functional perl wikis on the shortest wiki contest [c2.com] :-)
  • Re:What's wrong with CGI::Kwiki (Score:1)

    by Shlomi Fish (918)

    I dislike Kwiki quite a bit. Its newline handling is annoying, and it does not have attachments, or images. Cute and extensible, but still pretty lame.

    TWiki, OTOH, is superb in its syntax and power, albeit its code and initial usability may need an improvement.

    I was much more impressed with TWiki, which seems nice. MediaWiki (the Wiki behind the Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]) is very powerful, but seems like it would be an overkill for most things.

    Another Wiki I've seen in common use is Moin-Moin (which is written
    • Re:What's wrong with CGI::Kwiki (Score:2)

      by ajt (2546)

      CGI::Kwiki is designed with two goals in mind:

      • Simple clean design
      • Easily extendible by a simple plug-in architecture

      Relative to some of the other Wikis in Perl, it is a very simple clean design, it's not a mass of complex twisted spagetti. Unlike CGI::Wiki, another clean design, Kwiki is simple with minimal dependancies. This makes it one of the easiest to implement.

      As it's a simple design it doesn't come with a million features in the box, though it is fair to say it's has aquired more features in

      --
      -- "It's not magic, it's work..."