On 7 February 2013 17:06, Dan Andreescu dandreescu@wikimedia.org wrote:

I was on the other side of this, albeit a while back. We had to decide between MediaWiki and Confluence to power Disney's ParentPedia (which has since been abandoned): The main reasons we chose Confluence:

• An easier to understand API. This seems to not be a problem any more:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Client_code

• Easier setup on Windows:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Running_MediaWiki_on_Windows, possibly made easier now by Bitnami: http://bitnami.org/stack/mediawiki

yeah, I was speaking from my experience of MW vs Confluence, where the deciders were (1) no WYSIWYG and slightly (2) none of the fancy ACL stuff Confluence has. The ACLs were more a theoretical selling point to the business decision maker, but WYSIWYG swung it I think. And the users *hated* Confluence, but at least they didn't have to deal with Wikitext.

(In my current job I'm happily spreading MediaWikis far and wide, albeit with very little customisation. But I'm really keen to use the Visual Editor as soon as it's in a tarball version.)

- d.