this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
30 points (94.1% liked)

Selfhosted

40246 readers
752 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
30
Recommendations for lightweight wiki servers? (lemmy.sdf.org)
submitted 8 months ago by SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I currently run a personal wiki for some notes, recipes, and stuff. It's set up using Wiki.js as the server. I'm the only regular user, and I feel like it's a bit of an overkill.

Does someone have any suggestions for a more lightweight wiki server? I tried DokuWiki and mostly like it. But the UI is very old and dare I say, ugly. I love the UI of Wiki.js btw.

My main criteria is that it should be lightweight. I don't need fancy editing features. Happy to work with raw html or markdown files.

I need some kind of permission management to hide some private wikis from the public, but otherwise I don't really care.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] N0x0n@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Fossil looks really cool ! To bad they don't approve a container setup ! They surely have their reason.

[–] folkrav@lemmy.ca 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

They don’t? They even ship a Dockerfile, the prebuilt image is just not published on a registry

https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/containers.md

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Wow, they really hate the idea that everyone could just spin up a Docker container with their wiki software.

[–] folkrav@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Eh, they just don’t pre-build and publish the image themselves. Why assume malice? 🤷‍♂️

Btw, Fossil isn’t really a wiki software but a full on source control system a la git, with its own front end, that includes a wiki. It’s developed and used by the SQLite developers. It’s a single executable, so it’s pretty easy to run anywhere already, I assume they may just provide the Dockerfile for convenience…

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Given this context it seems much more reasonable having such a complex and long instructions page on how to run it in Docker. This seems to be something you don't just try and run simply for checking it out.

I looked at the instructions it under the premise of "lightweight wiki server" and did not check in detail what this specific software is.