GitHub - Zavy86/WikiDocs: 📗 Just a databaseless markdown flat-file wiki
github.com
📗 Just a databaseless markdown flat-file wiki. Contribute to Zavy86/WikiDocs development by creating an account on GitHub.

Probably old hat to some…but documentation is important. Just for once…I am trying to keep documentation AHEAD of the inevitable bork that destroys everything… so that in 3 months time I don’t have to reconstitute everything out of thin air and swearing.

Anyhow, I came across this lovely little repo a while ago and though “yes, next time, use this”

https://github.com/Zavy86/WikiDocs

And so I am :)

I’ll let the author speak to the perks (no affiliation, I just like wikidocs and wanted to share it)

  • Open source
  • Plain text files
  • No database required
  • Markdown syntax
  • YAML Frontmatter
  • Editor full WYSIWYG
  • Support for KaTeX math
  • Support for Mermaid diagrams
  • Unlimited page revisions
  • Uploading and downloading attachments
  • Uploading images (also from clipboard)
  • Content can be categorized in namespaces
  • Public and private browsing
  • Desktop and remote sync
  • Syntax highlighting
  • Multiple languages
  • Dark mode

While I show off a happy snap

  • SuspiciousCarrot78@aussie.zoneOPEnglish
    2·
    20 hours ago

    1. AGENTS.md is a contributor configuration file telling AI coding assistants how to work in the repo. It doesn’t say AI built the project any more than a .editorconfig file means VS Code wrote the code.

    2. “Ready for use with LLM tools you choose” describes ONE OF WikiDocs’ use cases, not its construction.

    3. The author of the project repeatedly says they coded it, not Claude coded it. Given they are a professional developer that created this project for use in their team, I am apt to believe them. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2nVq9RbG54

    4. Rule 7 and the expanded AI rules consistently use language like “your promotional post,” “if you are promoting a project,” and “if you are promoting a project where AI was used.”

    I explicitly disclaimed affiliation in my post, because I have none. A community member sharing something they use is not a promotional post in the rule’s meaning. I refer you to direct precedent from one of our mod team:

    https://lemmy.world/post/48847985/24538274

    " Promo, to be clear, is a self promotion post. ‘I found a neat project’ doesn’t apply, because you aren’t affiliated and wouldn’t know how it was developed, if AI was used and how, etc. You also wouldn’t be trying to get stars, clicks, donations, or payment for that software, so the promotion rules do not apply. It’s just a regular post".

    And discussed again by the same mod here:

    https://aussie.zone/post/36810313/25081612

    1. For your convenience, I have tagged the mod here, because you appear to be confused by how [AIT], [AIP] and [CBH] work while simultaneously wanting to police them. @curbstickle@anarchist.nexus

    2. Your [META] thread is on lemmy.world. My post originates from aussie.zone. Whether that’s a temporary federation issue or just an oversight, you’ve opened a moderation discussion about my post somewhere I can’t easily participate in it, on a topic that has already been settled by the mod team, sticked and sign posted. That’s poor netiquette regardless of intent.

    Shall we next audit every IDE autocomplete suggestion the dev ever accepted, look at their CV, review their commit history and inspect what they ate for lunch? Or can we just share cool things we find and let end users make up their own minds?

    • rako@tarte.nuage-libre.frFrançais
      12·
      11 hours ago

      I see you want to sink me under a lot of points, allow me to do the same:

      1. You’d have to be really naive to think that a project contains four AGENTS.md files and pretend AI wasn’t used
      2. .editorconfig is, at it says, a config for editors. You can pretty much infer that an editor was used, but you can’t say which. Just like an AGENTS.md indicates an AI was used, or is expected to be used, but you can’t know which one
      3. I said this project is AI-oriented, which the phrase you cite conforts.
      4. No one here is saying that Claude coded it. I raised the point because I assume AI was used, and this is what the policy talks about
      5. “Your promotional post” talks about the post, not the project
      6. “If you are promoting a project” talks about you promoting the project, meaning the post, not the project
      7. This is /c/selfhosted on lemmy.world. Other communities have other rules. The post you point to is made in another community, it’s irrelevant here.
      8. This is /c/selfhosted on lemmy.world. I’m asking the question in the community. Note that my instance isn’t lemmy.world.
      9. The discussion isn’t stickied nor linked from the rules. But it does exist

      Shall we next audit every IDE autocomplete suggestion the dev ever accepted, look at their CV, review their commit history and inspect what they ate for lunch?

      Is it possible to discuss as adults or do you have to resort to absurd arguments ?

      I assume that the tags don’t exist but to convey information. The information is relevant whether the author of the post is the author of the project or not, that’s why I asked for it.

      If you want my opinion on something that, as you said, as already be decided: if it’s too complicated to know whether AI was used, then flag it as AIP. There will be issues, just like any decision, but it will be a different set of issues. But are you really interested in my opinion or do you just want to pretend differing opinions are absurd ?

      Or can we just share cool things we find and let end users make up their own minds?

      That wouldn’t be in the spirit of disclosure, the one that was accepted by the community and for which you pinged a moderator now would it