[ruby-talk:7580] Re: Ruby RAA

Hi Dave,

> From: Dave Thomas
> Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 11:55 PM

> [e-mail] (GOTO Kentaro) writes:
> 
> > But why don't you use RWiki?  That allows us to write in our RD :-)
> > See ((<RAA:RWiki>)) and ((<RAA:RWiki-installer>)).

At first, I must thank to gotoken-san for citing RWiki.
And also thanks to Dave for pointing out the truth.

> To be honest: I had for other UseModWikis set up already: creating a
> new one takes about ten seconds. Installing and managing RWiki is far
> more complex (even with the installer). I was also concerned by the
> potential for the background demon to grow in size: this Wiki is
> running on a fairly small machine outside the firewall. So, UseModWiki 
> was a pragmatic choice.

I almost agreed.  RWiki is rather complex and heavy
for this purpose (discussion, organize, and reorganize
ideas).  I endose your pragmatic choice.

> I also thing that RWiki has a serious flaw. References to undefined
> pages show up just like normal links. This isn't the way a wiki is
> supposed to work. That fact that other wikis display ToBeDefined as
> ToBeDefined_?_ acts as both an aide memoire _and_ as an invitation for
> others to complete the work.

Someone claimed us to support this behavior like
"ToBeDefined?", but we have decided not to support it.
Since you can see if the page is defined or not at the
bottom of the page in RWiki, we did not think it
important.  Hmm, I'm still not familier to the way a
wiki is supposed to work.  I still cannot understand
what Wiki is for since [ruby-talk:4801].

> However, I also know that it might not be the most politically correct 
> thing to run a non-Ruby Wiki.

I never think it non-PC.  TIMTOLTDI.

// NaHi