[pmwiki-users] Wiki farm confusion

The Editor editor at fast.st
Thu Mar 16 19:08:10 CST 2006

Hagan wrote something like:
> How would you describe the difference between the new wikis and the original?
> i.e. the "field wiki" and the "home wiki".

Well, let's NOT throw the baby out with the bathwater.  It seems there
is consensus to call the fields wikis (I agree), and probably to stick
with the word "farm" to generally refer to these more complex 
installations. Not too much support for the barn concept :) though it
still might be useful explaining conceptually what we are doing in
documentation aimed at a real newbie.  Referring to a "code base" is
at least two letters better than a "code barn".

But couldn't we at least keep the word "field" as an adjective to
differentiate between the wiki's abroad and the one at home, if there
is one? Just to clarify things when needed. I say, stick with home
wiki's and field wiki's. With the emphasis on wikis.  I think this
discussion has been profitable and by now the terms are all be clear.
Why not put the focus on using them consistently, revise our
documentation as needed, and press forward.


P.S. Please don't completely scrap every trace of the metaphor.  It
really makes PmWiki seem more inviting. My first thought was there
must be some clever folks behind this project, with some real
personality (humor) and a genuine concern for making things simple for
non-techie users.  You really don't want to lose that first

P.P.S. If we do scrap the metaphor completely I think we also lose
some future potential perhaps we haven't yet considered.  I'm already
thinking we should pull together several conceptual (not technical)
papers somewhere on the site with best practice tips on how to make a
wiki "grow." I've been jokingly talking about crop transplants
(bundles of predesigned pages) that could be dropped in a wiki to add
near-instant complex functionality.  I can think of several right off
that would have saved me countless hours of tinkering. (Fun and
educational, but tending towards sleep deficiency). And for what it's
worth, I don't think it's a bad idea to have maybe four or five
complete skeleton wikis (oops), uh... bare field wikis already set up
in configurations and with features already preloaded.  Why couldn't
we have a wiki for example already set up as a cms with basic bare
bones (oops), uh... empty wiki leaves already to go.  Or a members
area type wiki.  Or a team collaboration configuration. Or whatever
it's commonly used for.  A person could pick the one closest to his
goals, set it up as either a home or field wiki, and 90% of his work
is done.  Just tweaking and adding content.  Why not? Hanging on to
the metaphor might just expand our thinking to what could be done with

More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list