migrating to mediawiki

Hendrik Boom hendrik at pooq.com
Wed Oct 19 08:49:44 PDT 2005

On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 04:13:32PM -0700, Brian Rice wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 3:53 PM, Far? wrote:
> >Dear Tunespeople,
> Are there Tunespeople any more? There are partisans and casual  
> observers, mostly. Someone reply if they disagree.
> >are there people here with some energy for maintaining the Tunes
> >project? The Wiki is in a sorry state, and needs to be redone.
> >
> >Two solutions:
> >(1) someone steps up to maintain cliki -- merge the latest
> >araneida/cliki sources, add some proper spam control, remove the ugly
> >low-level access control. (Maybe contact kiwi authors and use that
> >instead < http://wiki.alu.org/Kiwi >)
> >(2) someone steps up to migrate things to mediawiki. water did that
> >for the slate wiki, and he is quite pleased with it. Mediawiki can
> >also serve as the host for the more "static" content of the tunes
> >site.
> Additional notes:
> - We wouldn't have to lock down mediawiki as we have our cliki, since  
> unlike CLiki it has its own team of maintainers who have built in  
> spam control and reversion controls.
> - There are "talk" pages for the droning babbling debates people like  
> to have about microkernels and forth and such.
> - Lambda the Ultimate is close to using mediawiki for a Programming  
> Languages Technology wiki to consolidate the info on their years of  
> forum contents.
> - mediawiki supports inter-wiki links and redirects, so that we can  
> easily shunt entire technical articles to Wikipedia or LtU where they  
> are covered better there.
> - mediawiki does support categorization and tables of contents and is  
> otherwise extensible.
> >Is there a volunteer for (2), or at least for (1)? If not, I'll do it,
> >but it might take more time.
> Start up a new instance of mediawiki now, fully lock down the CLiki,  
> and hand out a pointer to it. The alternative is to ask the CL  
> community to re-implement the features.
> No one here on this mailing list is willing to code, I'll wager.  
> We've spent too long not making (TUNES) software that it's a bit  
> silly to ask now.

I've been working on a threaded-code interpreter that may satisfy
some of the needs of the TUENS project.  It's not FORTH, it's strongly
typed, it's garbage-collected, and it's barely reaching the pre-alpha stage.
It is designed so that it *could* have its innards replaced by something
that generates efficient, optimised machine-code without doing much to
the programs run on it.

Unlike the discussions that took place years and years ago on one
of the TUNES forums, it type-marks the integers instead of the pointers.

I haven't decided on a license yet -- it might be proprietary, might not,
might be somewhere in-between.

But there is at least one person writing something that might turn out
to be TUNES-related software.

But if I start maintaining a wiki, I will probably have no time left
for any programming progress.

-- hendrik

> --
> -Brian

More information about the TUNES mailing list