Subject: Re: mechanised documentation and my business model solution
From: Rich Morin <rdm@cfcl.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:53:33 -0800

At 3:18 PM -0500 3/26/06, Randy Kramer wrote:
> ... for wiki documentation I'd try to use CVS / Subversion (or ...

Alternatively, the data could be stored in a version control
system (VCS) and indexed by the RDBMS.  Or it could be stored
in both places (ATA disks currently list at $0.20/GB :-).  Etc.

However, I don't know of any wikis that use these ideas.  If some
hearty soul is considering implementing something like this, I'd
suggest consideration of the following (layered :-) approach:

  *  Start with a wiki that uses an RDBMS.

  *  Move the wiki to PostgreSQL.

  *  Add PL/PerlU, DBI-Link, and Perl DBI.

       http://www.cfcl.com/~rdm/weblog/archives/000999.html
       http://fetter.org/DBI-Link.pdf
       http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/plperl-trusted.html
       http://dbi.perl.org/

  *  Write and add a DBD for the VCS.


The layering ends up looking like this:

  (Wiki) -> PostgreSQL -> PL/PerlU -> DBI-Link
         -> Perl DBI   -> (DBD)    -> (VCS)


This stack allows great flexibility at the ends.  Either the
Wiki or the VCS can be swapped out, should that be desired.
That said, if you want to have the biggest impact, MediaWiki
(as used by Wikipedia) is the biggest target I can think of.

-r
-- 
http://www.cfcl.com/rdm            Rich Morin
http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume     rdm@cfcl.com
http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog     +1 650-873-7841

Technical editing and writing, programming, and web development