Florent Georges wrote:
Beware of
mediawiki OS packages, though. It's sad to say
this, but generally they don't do a good job with mediawiki.
Is there anything I should know in particular? The server I have to install MediaWiki
on is using Ubuntu. Is there
anything wrong with its packaging of MediaWiki?
Thanks!
First issue is that latest ubuntu, released on October only provides
mediawiki 1.13.3, while latest stable version is 1.15.1. The 1.13 branch
was released in August 2008 and has ended its one-year support from
mediawiki developers.
Sure, the package maintainers keep it secure by patching the security
issues (in fact they backported to a custom version the mediawiki
security releases 1.13.4 and 1.13.5).
You are given an outdated version, for no real security benefit, since
in the event of a bug, the fix would be first released from mediawiki,
and then backported there.
That needs the admin to keep an eye on it instead of relying in the
package manager, but the steps for upgrading mediawiki are just download
and extract the new files in the folder and -if it's a major upgrade-
run the maintenance/upgrade.php script (which would have to run manually
also if using apt).
Since it's written in an interpreted language, it doesn't have the
issues of compiled binaries.
Installation of MediaWiki is done via a friendly web page on both
methods. Apt does add mediawiki to the web space for cherokee and
apache, but that doesn't make the install significantly easier since you
can directly extract mediawiki in the web folder of your choice.
On the other hand, they move the mediawiki files over the filesystem, so
instead of having "everything in one folder", it's spread in /etc/,
/var/lib/mediawiki/, /usr/share/doc/mediawiki/...
Any documentation will refer to the official location, so this
redistribution often results in a user unable to locate its files.
Also, your users will likely want the features they see on wikipedia,
which runs the bleeding edge mediawiki version (currently, 1.16 alpha).
If they were added on a more recent version, you are out of luck (some
people even have their wiki running in trunk).
You are also likely to want to install mediawiki extensions. With an old
version, you are restricted to the extension version which existed with
your mediawiki was released (or check if you are lucky and a more recent
one also work). Extensions will need /some/ manual supervision since
neither your package manager nor mediawiki-announce will notify you
(although ubuntu has a mediawiki-extensions package with a few
extensions, perhaps you don't want any other one).
Running old software also the inconvenience that when you ask for help,
the regulars like to begin the answers with "You should upgrade" :)
Finally, if you already have the wiki installed, as seems to be your
case, downgrading isn't supported by mediawiki so if the package version
has a major version different than the version you have installed, you
should stick with the newer version (on contrary, upgrading is a
well-supported path).
Am I biased? Probably :)
I'm not against FHS, but the default mediawiki structure (needed for
people which doesn't have root access) works correctly. Mediawiki
packages have historically given some unhappy customers.
They are fine if you are ok with the above limitations. But given how
easy it is to keep it up to date, and being MediaWiki such a robust
software I don't find them worth.