Installation is easiest I found for docs sites (pip install mkdocs) and it's blazingly fast. Comes with good themes and proper responsive design (saw some issues in Raneto on my ios). Has proper live reloading and build in serve functionality.
For large projects (enterprise size) we have made our own version based on what I learned from the Polymer docs (https://github.com/Polymer/doc) but removed the GAE requirement. Also, we are considering if using SO Enterprise is a good solution. Personally I'm in favor for in house docs and knowledge sharing for that. It's so flexible and people are already used to it. But that is a different ball park considering the OP.
To end with a positive note. Raneto seems to support much of the same as mkdocs or any of its alternatives. It looks good and whilst static site is something I want I understand it is not a deal breaker for all. In addition, Raneto mentions authentication is built in which is a nice thing if I want to host for internal stuff on a public domain so external customers can also use it without requiring a VPN account. Overall, nice work! Not for today, but I have bookmarked it.
A few months ago I left Evernote for my own implementation because I felt that Evernote gave me too little expressive power: No hierarchy, no typed relationships, no plugins. Basically, I was looking for a combination of outliner and concept map, combined with easy image handling. Plus, I wanted to easily add _applications_ like an ebook library, journaling, timelines of events, and generation of static websites and presentations.
I am a huge fan of simplicity and even toyed with PicoCMS by the same author as Raneto. Ultimately though, at least for me, a combination of a simple mysql database with markdown as content format gave me the power I wanted for my personal knowledge base, https://knowfox.com
I just figured this was a new term for a searchable FAQ. What do you think the difference is?
From the Wikipedia page[0]:
Knowledge management products adopted the term "knowledge-base" to describe their repositories but the meaning had a subtle difference. In the case of previous knowledge-based systems the knowledge was primarily for the use of an automated system, to reason about and draw conclusions about the world. With knowledge management products the knowledge was primarily meant for humans, for example to serve as a repository of manuals, procedures, policies, best practices, reusable designs and code, etc. Of course in both cases the distinctions between the uses and kinds of systems were ill defined. As the technology scaled up it was rare to find a system that could really be cleanly classified as knowledge-based in the sense of an expert system that performed automated reasoning and knowledge-based in the sense of knowledge management that provided knowledge in the form of documents and media that could be leveraged by humans
There's also a lot to be said about the way that reStructuredText provides standard plugin spaces in the markup. While it may look over verbose at first glance, it is a great thing when you start to pick up that a lot of reStructuredText is based on the same plugin markup and there's a consistent way to work with new plugins. Something like that could be hugely useful to Markdown, and probably could have stymied some of the complications in standardizing things like Common Mark and GFM had that consideration been baked in from early on.
Examples that don't feel natural are image syntax, dropping down to HTML for unsupported features (pre-supposes output format), emphasis on presentation vs. semantics, the various flavors of writing tables, etc. How do I write an index? A table of contents? Any way to differentiate a footnote or an aside from a basic link?
YAML front matter is a great ad hoc standard for including metadata about a document within the document. It would be great if the various flavors of Markdown standardized on that, too.
[1] More at -> https://texti.github.io
== What is easier to write?
<!-- md comment -->
or
// adoc comment
== What is easier to write?
<a href="http://foo.com"></a>
or
image:adoc-foo.jpg[link="http://foo.com"]
== What is easier to write?
1. first md - no auto numbering
2. second md - no auto numbering
3. third md - no auto numbering
or
. first adoc - auto numbering
. second adoc - auto numbering
. third adoc - auto numbering
What is easier to write?
[Get the PDF]({% raw %}{{ site.url }}{% endraw %}/assets/my-md-file.pdf)
or
link:{ctx_path}/assets/my-adoc-file.pdf[Get the PDF]
That looks like a bullet to me. How do you differentiate unordered and ordered lists?
Also, markdown auto-numbers too, so you can just prefix every item with `1` if you'd like.
```
mkdir my-site
cd my-site
curl http://mdwiki.info
echo "# Hello World" > index.md
python -m SimpleHTTPServer 8000
```
Now visit http://localhost:8000 in your browser and it's live. Publish to Github Pages and you're golden.
I'm running Chrome 59.0.3071.115. Fedora 26 64bit.
After having had to build knowledge bases in each company I worked in or go through the pain of implementing something bloated like Zendesk, I built a SaaS version of what I really wanted: the simplest knowledge base out there that stays out of your way.
Don't have Markdown support (yet) but we have a generous Free tier including custom domain (CNAME) support.
</a>](http://foo.com"></a>){kind=link}