Bug#963885: RFP: gollum -- simple, Git-powered wiki with a sweet API and local frontend
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name : gollum
Version : 5.0.1
Upstream Author : https://github.com/orgs/gollum/people
* URL : https://github.com/gollum/gollum
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Ruby
Description : simple, Git-powered wiki with a sweet API and local frontend
Gollum is a simple wiki system built on top of Git. A Gollum Wiki is
simply a git repository of a specific nature:
* A Gollum repository's contents are human-editable text or markup files.
* Pages may be organized into directories any way you choose.
* Other content can also be included, for example images, PDFs and
headers/footers for your pages.
* Gollum pages:
* May be written in a variety of markups.
* Can be edited with your favourite system editor or IDE (changes
will be visible after committing) or with the built-in web
interface.
* Can be displayed in all versions, reverted, etc.
* Gollum strives to be compatible with GitHub wikis (see
--lenient-tag-lookup)
* Gollum supports advanced functionality like:
* UML diagrams
* BibTeX and Citation support
* Annotations using CriticMarkup
* Mathematics via MathJax
* Macros
* Redirects
* RSS Feed of latest changes
* ...and more
%%%
Curiously, Gollum is not packaged in Debian. The GitLab fork is:
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gollum-lib
... but not the upstream Gollum. This would be fine if we actually had
a Gollum binary, but gollum-lib is just that: a library, without an
actual binary that renders the wiki.
That's really too bad! GitLab has nice little instructions on how to
preview your changes locally when you do edits in a clone of a wiki,
but those cannot be run on Debian because Gollum is missing...
Another similar program that is planned to be packaged in Debian is
"realms-wiki":
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=895760
... and there are of course many, many more wikis packaged in
Debian. But I think "GitHub/GitLab compatibility" should be important
enough to warrant a new one...
Reply to: