Improved wikis with more markup options | Hacker News Reader

Improved wikis with more markup options

blog.bitbucket.org

155 pointsamarsahinovic23 comments

I'm still a fan of bitbucket. While I like Github if I wanted to open source some software, I like bitbucket for hosting my private repos. I can use this for backup for any project I'm working on and not worry about it. This could be for backing up config files (/etc/) on my linux box, or some project I'm wipping up that I don't really want to share with the world.

While Github is nice for its social and discovery aspect, if I just want code hosting, Bitbucket are a great solution.

Also, for those large companies that want to run their software internally, Bitbucket's solution is quite a bit cheaper than Github. I haven't had to setup either (or use either), but the pricing for Bitbucket makes it very appealing.

[1] http://www.atlassian.com/software/stash/pricing

[2] https://enterprise.github.com/pricing

Note that Stash isn't the same product as Bitbucket; and doesn't include a bug tracker or wiki.

There's also HgLab ( http://hglabhq.com )

Stash is Git, hglab is Mercurial I would say Gitorious[1] would be a closer comparison to Stash.

[1] https://gitorious.org/

I use BitBucket for the same thing. In the old days I hosted my own SVN server but now I've migrated my projects to Git and pushed them up to BitBucket. They are private repos that only I use but it's awesome to have a backup as well as being able to push from my machine and pull down from my server for deployments.

Free hosting for private repos is really great, and it ties in nicely with SourceTree.

Thanks to the BitBucket devs for integrating markdown in the wiki. Much appreciated!

That's really nice. I would really like something like this in their Confluence product. Currently, I have to use their special "Confluence Wiki Markup" language, but when saving it is immediately transformed into rich text, meaning I can never edit the wiki markup again. I'm forced to include the wiki markup file as an attachment to the wiki so I can edit it later.

Yes! This is an annoying new feature... I wonder why they did this!

Wiki markup didn't suit the non-technical crowd.

If you're a fan of wiki markup in Confluence and have upgraded to >= 4, you might want to use this plugin.

https://bobswift.atlassian.net/wiki/display/CWP/Wiki+Plugin+...

I really like BitBucket but I don't love markdown, afaik it lacks key features and power. It's also bit annoying to add trailing spaces etc, even if I code in Python and am used to meaningful whitespace.

I've been considering using markdown for a project of my own. What sort of key features and power do you feel it lacks?

I don't know about BitBucket's particular flavor of Markdown, but for a full-featured Markdown, see [Pandoc](http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/). It supports the elements you're probably missing, ex. definition lists, tables, LaTeX math, footnotes. To add a line-break, it supports using a backslash instead of trailing spaces.

Also, Pandoc gets deeply-nested lists right.

Really enjoying using Bitbucket. If it wasn't for them, I'd have never understood the power of Git since I'm not from a development background.

I also really like their issue tracking features.

I love Bitbucket - it's a great no-frills, straight-to-the-point Git hosting solution.

My only problem with them is that they still don't support elliptic curve encryption for ssh keys, despite the fact that this has been the OpenSSH default for quite some time now. Worse, they seem not to be interested in supporting them: https://bitbucket.org/site/master/issue/4222/no-support-for-...

Awesome! Is that editor open source?

very cool. but remember folks, wiki is where docs go to die.

Ha, so true!

So, where to put docs when you want the team to read them, and act upon them?

In fact, how to write documentation that's useful like this at all? The more teams I work with, the more I see need for documentation and yet the less faith I have that any will help.

I wanted to like bitbucket for the private free repos that they offer.

But I ran into an domain verification issue when I tried to update/push a repository as listed in their docs.

So I did a bit of dig and found this:

~ » dig bitbucket.org

;; ANSWER SECTION:

bitbucket.org. 36584 IN A 207.223.240.182

bitbucket.org. 36584 IN A 207.223.240.181

OK. So two IPs there. I visit those IPs and they show what seems like some usernames that have zero activity and seem suspicious (to my paranoid brain atleast).

Last I remember, which was about a couple of months ago, 182 was fetching the proper bitbucket.org pages. But even that seems to show up some username created in Dec 2012(!)

This doesn't make any sense. You had an issue verifying your own domain... I don't understand what that has to do with bitbucket's DNS. ... so then you loaded the site directly from the IP? And then you were surprised that it gave you a random virtual host?

> You had an issue verifying your own domain.

No. There was an issue verifying bitbucket.org. A git push could never be done because of some cert issue. That is when I dug a little further to look at the IPs directly.

FWIW, the cert issue seems to be resolved now. I just checked with two VMs.

That's probably just some web route mishap that didn't expect to be accessed without a hostname and probably maps to two (unfortunate) user IDs that match the IP addresses, or something. Try reporting it to @bitbucket on twitter?

So what are the implications here?

as far as I can tell, none what-so-ever. Go ahead and visit the sites yourself.

[1] http://207.223.240.181/ [2] http://207.223.240.182/

For whatever reason, going to those IP addresses, take you to 2 these pages:

[3] http://bitbucket.org/dqvsra [4] http://bitbucket.org/antonrylov

There isn't anything really of interest on either of the pages. It's not like you're seeing their logged in page. This is just some kind of routing issue with Bitbuckets server configuration.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com