[Scons-users] Wiki not working

Matthew Swabey mattaw at gmail.com
Tue Dec 9 15:27:23 EST 2014

If I could interject that if you are thinking of moving to a new system 
please use httrack to freeze the current wiki into static html for 
reference purposes and historical purposes. Effectively unhackable and 
very low on resources apart from the space :)


On 12/9/2014 2:41 PM, William Roberts wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de 
> <mailto:tshortik at gmx.de>> wrote:
>     On 09.12.2014 19:57, Bill Deegan wrote:
>         Dirk,
>         The real problem is that this particular wiki spikes the CPU
>         usage on our free server and if it stays too long too high
>         cpu, they shut it down. Then we need to figure out if it was
>         hacked (again) and if not convince them that it's safe to put
>         back online.
>     Got that now. Thanks for the additional info.
>         The approveChanges is (unfortunately since it would be easier
>         to solve as you suggest) a secondary issue.
>         The options are:
>         a) migrate to other wiki software (which we manage and run on
>         same server, possibly open to the same problem)
>         b) migrate to some other hosted solution (wiki on bitbucket,
>         or other)
> FYI The default wiki on bitbucket is limited. The permissions are 
> either Public (world writeable, world readbale think 0666) or Private 
> (project members only, 0660). However, if its private, non-project 
> members cannot even see it. I had this issue with using it and created 
> a secondary site. Recently, Bitbucket supports Markdown in their 
> README files and you can use that as a read only source of public 
> information. Github doesn't seem to have this limitation. I am not 
> sure that if you pay for bitbucket, if one gets different wiki 
> permissions or capabilities.
>         I'm heavily favoring b, as keeping said software secure and up
>         to date is really a waste of all/any of our time at this
>         point. Better to spend that time on SCons or other infrastructure.
>         Thoughts?
>     My gut feeling tells me that we'll get hacked either way...but if
>     you have some more insight about how alternatives would be more
>     secure, that's fine with me. I just didn't want to switch for the
>     only reason of having a neglected approval queue, and that was my
>     first impression. Sorry for the noise...
>     Dirk
>     _______________________________________________
>     Scons-users mailing list
>     Scons-users at scons.org <mailto:Scons-users at scons.org>
>     https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
> -- 
> Respectfully,
> William C Roberts
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-users mailing list
> Scons-users at scons.org
> https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist4.pair.net/pipermail/scons-users/attachments/20141209/1497927a/attachment.html>

More information about the Scons-users mailing list