2
Vote

This thing is crap.

description

I don't even know where to start. I could write my own before I could write up everything that is wrong with this thing. Slow as a glacier. Non friendly URL's. No role based URL access. Unzip installer has plugins in wrong place. Having to have LDAP settings for hosting on Windows domain server using NT auth is a joke and does not work. I thought it would be more light weight than others, but even SharePoint may be a better option.

comments

Seddryck wrote Jul 6, 2014 at 9:33 PM

In place of being so arrogant, you could give the same message in a most constructive way.

1) Report a bug for the incorrect folders for for plugins
2) Vote for new features such as friendly'url ... or better write an implementation and share it.
3) Ask yourself, why you're not able to setup correctly the LDAP when some people successfully achieve this. Then when you've find your mistake, write a blog post about your experience and share with everybody your insights.
4) Stop whining. You're looking for something lightweight but two sentences before you're complaining about missing features.
5) How could you compare a free product dedicated to wiki to something like Sharepoint. No seriously you hoped that it would have more features?

In two words contribute and stop whining!

PS: you're welcome to write your own and please share it.

nopcodex90 wrote Jul 16, 2014 at 4:10 PM

I don't really think its about being arrogant. I have been developing software for a very long time, and from trying to find the source code to actually compiling has been a nightmare. Its hard to contribute to something so disheveled as this project has become.

bsimser wrote Aug 19, 2014 at 6:43 PM

Taking a look at the project for the first time and I'll throw my comments in here as constructively as I can.

I do tend to agree with some of the points @foofoodog did but yeah, he could have been a little more positive.

The speed is perception. Since I have no idea what hardware he's running on who knows what performance is like. I have it running both locally on my laptop (a typical dev machine) and a development 2008 R2 web server (4GB RAM, 2GHz) and it runs fine. The features can just be voted on, added, etc. or even implemented as mentioned so we'll just skip that.

Architecturally I'm not sure the install process is very friendly. The app requires some pretty special access. I just downloaded the zip copy and copied the files, playing pretty dumb to setup (no editing of the web.config file, etc.). First off I had to create a bin\plugins folder because it simply crashed otherwise (and had to turn errors off to find that). That was fine but then it took a few tries to get past the database wizard stage. Again I'm just trying this out so not setting up a database or anything. Eventually I just gave in and gave the application pool identity full access to the folder.

Then I got to the LDAP screen. While it does give an example most people might not know or be able to figure this out. I've been messing around with LDAP for years so I can guess mine (and have used it in the past) but the instructions are pretty obtuse. Suggesting you install AD Explorer first is also discouraging. Must I really install some client tool to help me (and it really doesn't tell me how that will help me). The message "the connection string supports OU specifiers however doing it this way can cause issues" is also discouraging. What issues does it cause? Why? Are they going to be fixed? Then having to specify groups, I had to pull out AD Explorer myself just to find a valid group to use. All in all, the LDAP setup is hard and should not be a stumbling block to setting up the system.

Also the last step gave me a warning if I was running on IIS7 I needed to configure web.config. You provide an example and mention "below are the elements that are required". It's not clear if I have to have these or not? Also, didn't I just give you permission to modify web.config back in the first step of this so why isn't the installer doing this for me? "may need". Again, you're an installer and should be able to know whether or not these changes are needed.

Next is security. I have the site setup a just a normal application. After getting to the home page I saw "Logged in as NT AUTHORITY/IUSR" which tells me the site isn't using impersonation, etc. Even more setup. Oh yeah, lightbulb. This is probably why I was being told that I might have to make a change to my web.config. Also in this day and age (and IIS 7) we really shouldn't be editing web.config manually. That's what the IIS manager is for and we can simply change a couple of settings in there that will update the web.config for us. web.config editing is fine but should be the last option, not the first or only one offered up. After changing the app from anonymous to authenticated my name showed up so it knew who I was.

After firing it up it looked good and told me I had no homepage (but did tell me how to set one so that was good). I did notice a bug. I just created the page and site, set the home page and told me it was last editing 6 hours ago. Probably some timezone issue (my server is -7GMT).

Suggestions

I would suggest better documentation on the setup. The current install page lists pre-reqs and "basic technical knowledge of Windows to setup IIS". It mentions ISAPI handlers and permissions but I didn't do anything other than set it up with my out-of-the-box IIS install. I just feel the install page could be written to be more friendly, less techy. IMHO the adoption rate of any software is dependent on things like simplicity. Having to jump through hoops (like LDAP) just drives people away. If you're providing an install then it should be simple. The Wordpress setup for example is 1) unzip files 2) visit website 3) answer 2 or three questions. There is the database side of things but it's pretty no-brainer. This setup however I would see my junior dev/it guy struggling with. There are a lot of choices and options you present just on your installer page along with "if this happens...." but I would suggest giving the happy shiny path and some clear indicators of what to do in specific cases, trying to keep it simple. There are common issues listed and that's good but again the documentation is a hard read. Adoption and setup should be easy, especially since you're providing a wizard. Anyone should be able to setup the system in 5 minutes.

There's a comment about how dishelved this project has become and frankly I just found it last week but I tend to agree. I hit the home page and found the regular stuff I would see but digging in I'm really confused about where the focus of the work is being done.

There's a wiki site that looks like it should be the main site (http://roadkillwiki.net/wiki/1/welcome). There's a codplex site where (I think) the latest code is, there's a uservoice site for new features, there's help on stackoverflow, issues on bitbucket, a forum on google groups. All of which can be done by codeplex so why the external sources? Yes, UserVoice is better for feedback but then why bother with CodePlex then if you're not using any of the features? I also found a copy up on git (https://github.com/yetanotherchris/roadkill) that was pointed to in the documentation. So I'm really confused what the central point, the hub, of the project is. It's fine if you use different sites that do things better, like issue management, over a single site but codeplex, github and bitbucket all have features for issue tracking, source code, and wikis. The variety of tools used here makes the project look like a mess. Where do I go for what?

Anyways, hopefully this reaches someone and hopefully it provides some feedback you see as useful.

Thanks!

MarkHK wrote Dec 14, 2014 at 7:17 PM

Hi,

bsimser, seems like I am getting issues similar to yours. However, the permissions thing is killing me. How did you get it to work? I tried giving permissions to all sort of users and system users, but nothing works.

cheetahtech wrote Jul 21, 2015 at 4:46 PM

dude, don't be an ass. Contribute or shut up. Thats all.

Its a solid wiki with a lot of potential. Probably one of the best and easiest wikis Ive used in a long time. Its a mile ahead of all the other free wikis out there.