D
Denis Kasak
CBFalconer said:
TINC is shortened for "There Is No Cabal", as explained here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TINC
-- Denis
TINC is shortened for "There Is No Cabal", as explained here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TINC
-- Denis
G
Giannis Papadopoulos
Giannis said:
As I see it, there are no C wikis.
I was away for some days, and I've just read all the relevant answers.
Firstly, copyright issues are number one priority for a wiki or
open-sourcem, since when the project gets bigger, it is very difficult
to reform and remove the copyrighted part.
If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am currently
searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and I have to
check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many ads).
And yes, such a wiki could result in a real mess, but if you don't try
it, you don't know how it would end up...
--
one's freedom stops where others' begin
Giannis Papadopoulos
http://dop.users.uth.gr/
University of Thessaly
Computer & Communications Engineering dept.
N
Netocrat
]
Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the group
to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It may be that
the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat to support such
things as limiting access and emailing updates to contributors. I
also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative documentation
development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c wiki (had to
disclose my personal bias
.
It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
The important thing is getting the support and assistance of the regulars
of the group so that the wiki has actual authority.
Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the group
to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It may be that
the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat to support such
things as limiting access and emailing updates to contributors. I
also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative documentation
development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c wiki (had to
disclose my personal bias
.It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
The important thing is getting the support and assistance of the regulars
of the group so that the wiki has actual authority.
F
Flash Gordon
Netocrat said:]
[...]
Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the group
to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It may be that
the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat to support such
things as limiting access and emailing updates to contributors. I
also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative documentation
development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c wiki (had to
disclose my personal bias
It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.
I would not give people root access to the box, but would not have any
problem with installing customised SW after appropriate review.
If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
broadband connection.
Indeed.
N
Netocrat
Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
chosen/developed wiki software is supported? i.e. which OS, which web
server, any installed database servers, any server side scripting support
esp. PHP and Perl. Are you willing to install any new software e.g. db
server or scripting language?
Anything else you think is relevant that I've missed...
Should work fine so long as you don't disappear leaving other maintainers
unable to access the raw data (e.g. db server dumps) or perform admin
tasks on the site.
Does the server have a domain name yet?
[...]
F
Flash Gordon
Netocrat said:[...]
If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am
currently searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and
I have to check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many
ads).
Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the
group to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It
may be that the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat
to support such things as limiting access and emailing updates to
contributors. I also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative
documentation development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c
wiki (had to disclose my personal bias
It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.
Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
chosen/developed wiki software is supported?
It's an Apple iMac running Gentoo Linux up in my bedroom. Currently only
a couple of gig oh HD space free, but I've got a HD about 180G larger
sitting waiting for me to install it.
Gentoo Linux with Apache.
I've got some installed but not yet configured. I can easily have MySQL,
PostreSQL or anything else that is free.
The photo albums are done with Perl, something else is done with
mod_perl and I think PHP got pulled in but I'm not using it.
Yes, which was the reason for my offer.
Well, there is always the risk of me (or anyone else) disappearing.
However, I have been here off and on for a while.
I have a domain and a few sub-domains point at it. The main ones
pointing at it are home.flash-gordon.me.uk and www.home.flash-gordon.me.uk
However, I have full control of the domain, so I could easily point
clc.flash-gordon.me.uk at it. I've also got Apache configured to run
virtual servers, so I can have clc.flash-gordon.me.uk purely for this.
I don't currently have time to research the SW, but if people spec what
SW they want I can install it and get it configured I'm sure.
N
Netocrat
That setup should be supported by most (probably all) wiki software.
[...]
Perhaps others could store backups of the site, or we could make sure that
others have access to raw data through an html interface in case of
misadventure.
That would work well. I looked at clc.net and clc.org but they're already
taken. There are some other options that aren't yet taken but I won't
publicise them.
I'd imagine the wiki to be accepted by regulars here would have to have
user management to limit who can post and notification facilities to
indicate to maintainers when changes occur.
Based on this comparison:
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2004/11/04/which_wiki.html it looks
like MediaWiki is a good choice. It's the software that
http://wikipedia.org uses.
It uses PHP and mySQL, it has some basic user rights management and a
description of email notification is here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Watching_pages
Email notification seems to be somewhat in development but may be
sufficient to start with: "Having a separate email for every edited page
that one likes to watch in the sense of the other watch features, may be
too much. New features are being proposed and developed to deal with this:
the option to have emails sent, after a delay, with a list of edited
pages, and/or the possibility to specify a subset of watched pages for
email notification."
However I haven't used it, so others may have comments as to its
suitability.
M
Mark F. Haigh
On a whim I just bought complangc.net for a year. I've been busy for
the last several weeks on a rather strenuous contract, but hopefully
I'll get a bit of a break in a week or so.
When that time comes, I'll sit down and try to find a dedicated server
or a dedicated virtual server plan where we can install and run
whatever we like, including:
* Run a collaboritive editing system (probably a
wiki), and necessary associated databases.
* Run a source control management server (subversion,
perforce if they'll let us have a free license, etc).
* Run plain old Apache with per-user HTML directories
for code, articles, notes, etc.
* nntpd, qmail, webmail, sftp, ssh to the shell, etc.
If there's something out there that's reasonably priced enough, I'll
buy the first year of hosting as a way of saying thanks.
Obviously only trustworthy regulars are likely to receive an account.
If there's interest, I'll continue; otherwise, I'll eat the domain
registration fee-- it wasn't very expensive.
Mark F. Haigh
(e-mail address removed)
M
Mac
I had to use wtf for that one.
$ which wtf
/usr/games/bin/wtf
$
$ wtf is TINC
TINC: there is no cabal
$
--Mac
S
Steve Summit
Richard said:
Too true, alas. (As you can see, it took me rather a while to
pick up on this thread. :-( )
For what it's worth, copyright issues aside, I do try not to be
too possessive of it, or use the word "my" to qualify it. And in
a very important way it does "belong" to the group -- as I wrote
in the Preface,
This book also retains, I hope, the philosophy of correct
C programming which I began learning when I started
reading net.lang.c...
I was the one who stuck his neck out and started writing
the Frequent questions down, but I would hate to give the
impression that the answers are somehow mine.
Steve Summit
(e-mail address removed)
S
Steve Summit
Ben said:
True, and if I were worried about copyright (which for the most
part I'm not), I could assert it on the questions, too, since
they're *not* verbatim copies of any actually-posted questions;
they're all paraphrased. (This actually came in handy, once,
in deflecting the criticisms of a somewhat confused, irate
individual. Set your wayback machine to <http://groups.google.com/
group/comp.lang.c/msg/b4b8a8deaff89a63>, if you're curious.)
But, as I said, I'm not too worried about copyright, and (as far
as the book-length version of the FAQ list is concerned) I doubt
Addison-Wesley is too concerned any more, either. And I do
retain the right to post the entire content of the book to the
net (a right which I've been threatening/promising to exercise
for an uncomfortable number of years now), though I'm not sure
how that right would translate into the proposed "c.l.c FAQ wiki".
Steve Summit
(e-mail address removed)
J
Joe Wright
Steve said:
How impressively humble. You clearly deserve more credit than you demand
here. Your stock, in my book, has gone up.
R
Richard Heathfield
Steve Summit said:
Better late than never.
Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your attitude
to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After all, you would
be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier alongside Chris*
Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the subject).
Would you be:
(a) open to the idea of a C FAQ wiki?
(b) prepared to perform the necessary incantations and
rune-casting required for deciding on Cabal members?
*I initially mistyped this as "Christ" instead of "Chris" - apologies to
Jesus and Chris, and definitely in that order!
Better late than never.
Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your attitude
to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After all, you would
be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier alongside Chris*
Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the subject).
Would you be:
(a) open to the idea of a C FAQ wiki?
(b) prepared to perform the necessary incantations and
rune-casting required for deciding on Cabal members?
*I initially mistyped this as "Christ" instead of "Chris" - apologies to
Jesus and Chris, and definitely in that order!
F
Flash Gordon
Richard said:Steve Summit said:
Better late than never.
Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your attitude
to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After all, you would
be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier alongside Chris*
Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the subject).
Would you be:
(a) open to the idea of a C FAQ wiki?
(b) prepared to perform the necessary incantations and
rune-casting required for deciding on Cabal members?
As a matter of fact (rather than principal) whoever is hosting it has
ultimate power, after all if you have root access on the box you can do
what you want to it. On which subject, I've put up an initial site at
http://clc.flash-gordon.me.uk/ with some initial discussions between a
few of us on organisation. Others are welcome and will be given full
privilege on request (including the ability to grant privilege) as long
as one of us recognises you and think you have a sufficient degree of
(un)common sense.
I have absolutely no intention of trying to control the site myself
since I know others here know more about C than I do. The only thing I
intend to keep personal control of is the software installed and running
on the machine. I will happily install/upgrade SW within reason.
IRTA Jesus Chris...
R
Richard Heathfield
Flash Gordon said:
So either you'd have to place amazing trust in the host, or you'd have to
come up with a way to make up a RAIH on which to host the wiki.
The few I saw were: FlashGordon, Ipapadop, and Netocrat.
What you actually need is the likes of Martin Ambuhl, Christian Bau, Mark
Brader, Billy Chambless, Dann Corbit, Chris Dollin, Chuck Falconer, Jack
Klein, Kaz Kylheku, Lawrence Kirby, Mikey Lee, Joe Maun, Ben Pfaff, Dan
Pop, Sunil Rao, Will Rose, Richard Stamp, Steve Summit, Dave Thompson,
Keith Thompson, Chris Torek (aargh, did it again), Stephan Wilms, Dik
Winter, ...
You know... the Cabal!
Let me know when you have Chris or Steve on board, or at least six others
out of those I listed above. Or Dennis Ritchie, of course.
So either you'd have to place amazing trust in the host, or you'd have to
come up with a way to make up a RAIH on which to host the wiki.
The few I saw were: FlashGordon, Ipapadop, and Netocrat.
What you actually need is the likes of Martin Ambuhl, Christian Bau, Mark
Brader, Billy Chambless, Dann Corbit, Chris Dollin, Chuck Falconer, Jack
Klein, Kaz Kylheku, Lawrence Kirby, Mikey Lee, Joe Maun, Ben Pfaff, Dan
Pop, Sunil Rao, Will Rose, Richard Stamp, Steve Summit, Dave Thompson,
Keith Thompson, Chris Torek (aargh, did it again), Stephan Wilms, Dik
Winter, ...
You know... the Cabal!
Let me know when you have Chris or Steve on board, or at least six others
out of those I listed above. Or Dennis Ritchie, of course.
N
Netocrat
[on Steve Summit's participation in this thread]
To date, we three are the active planners, but we welcome any
comp.lang.c contributors who wish to join us.
[...]
The wording of parts of Flash Gordon's post may have been a little
hasty and ill-considered, particularly regarding the host having
"ultimate power" over the site and "as long as one of us recognises
you" possibly seeming to imply that the current 3 planners confer some
special status upon themselves.
In fact, we want the site to succeed and are not at all pretentious in
our attitude. There is some ambiguity as to how to decide who should
be allowed to moderate/edit, and any ideas on that issue are welcome.
Ultimately I'd like to develop an endorsement/reputation system that
wouldn't require restricted access at all but (a) that wiki technology
doesn't exist yet and it's not clear that it would have the support of
the more senior/expert comp.lang.c contributors and (b) it is simplest
to try a natural approach of adding people as moderators by invitation
or request which may work until/unless conflict develops; this is the
idea that Flash was attempting to communicate.
We don't consider ourselves owners of the wiki; we want c.l.c regulars
to feel (justifiably, by whatever means are most appropriate) that they
communally own it.
Trust is definitely an issue. The Mediawiki software that we're using
may support something like a RAIH; if not then it does at least have
reasonable export/import backup support. The minimal trust solution
that I can think of is to find a way of sharing
ownership/administration of the domain name amongst the moderators.
That way if the administrator of a machine screws around, the
moderators can simply point the domain to a more trustworthy machine
set up from backups.
This requires the registrar of the domain to recognise that the
domain's ownership is shared. I don't know if this is currently
possible. OTOH, there is a precedent in that financial institutions
generally allow shared accounts.
[reordered]
The group of people you proposed seem like good candidates as those who
should have moderation/edit access to a comp.lang.c wiki. Their
input/advice would be welcome and should any of them choose to create
an account on the planning site as referenced above, they would of
course also be given sysop privileges.
We have privately contacted Steve Summit regarding whether he would be
willing to support a comp.lang.c wiki site by donating the FAQ under
the copyright we propose, which is the GNU FDL. I won't disclose the
details of his response without his permission, but it was at least
positive. I hope that he continues to participate in this thread as
time allows.
R
Richard Heathfield
Netocrat said:
If he lets you use the FAQ as an initial base for the project, you're
halfway home - I reckon quite a few of the clc experts would be prepared to
follow that up positively, since they've secretly been itching to edit the
FAQ for years.
If he lets you use the FAQ as an initial base for the project, you're
halfway home - I reckon quite a few of the clc experts would be prepared to
follow that up positively, since they've secretly been itching to edit the
FAQ for years.
F
Flash Gordon
Richard said:
It has been suggested privately that it might have looked like I am on a
power trip, if so I apologise. This was not my intent and, indeed, I
would have no objection to any other hosting arrangements.
I have every intention of bowing to majority verdict, It's just that I
will have to action any changes that require root access whilst I am
doing the hosting on the current system since I can't afford to give
root access to people I don't know personally since I am also hosting
other stuff for friends.
I am merely the person who has initially stepped forward to provide as
flexible hosting as possible.
A few names there I don't recognise, but I entirely agree with those I
do and would bow to their superior knowledge of standard C.
We will, of course, post here when we have news. Discussions were only
taken off here so that we don't clutter up the group with off topic
discussions about Wiki's etc. We are not trying to exclude people and,
indeed, we would welcome more input and will give away Wiki sysop
privileges and access to the back end DB if people want the access.
M
Mark B
R
Richard Heathfield
Mark B said:
So I went. And I looked. And I corrected a few silly stupid problems with
their description of "hello world". And I hacked at the rather uncritical
praise of NRIC. And I thought "no, this is no good, the whole tone of the
wikipedia C entry is "this language is broken, use something else instead"
- and no wonder, because it was written by people who really, really don't
understand what it's about.
No, if we're going to have a C FAQ wiki, let's have a good one, that starts
from a solid base, not a heap of junk like the article on wikipedia.
So I went. And I looked. And I corrected a few silly stupid problems with
their description of "hello world". And I hacked at the rather uncritical
praise of NRIC. And I thought "no, this is no good, the whole tone of the
wikipedia C entry is "this language is broken, use something else instead"
- and no wonder, because it was written by people who really, really don't
understand what it's about.
No, if we're going to have a C FAQ wiki, let's have a good one, that starts
from a solid base, not a heap of junk like the article on wikipedia.