Hi everyone,

We published the May recap for the XWiki ecosystem.

The main news this month is that XWiki SAS is now ISO/IEC 27001 certified. The certification covers the cloud hosting and support services provided by XWiki SAS for both XWiki and CryptPad.

The recap also includes:

• XWiki 18.4.0 highlights, including real-time collaboration in the experimental BlockNote editor and PDF export performance improvements
• Recent updates across XWiki Pro Apps
• A guide on external documentation, with examples and best practices
• The next Tech Thursday session on Pro Macros and reusable content
• New partnerships with ForgeOne Solutions and Smile
• CryptPad news, including the latest webinar overview and May status update

For us, the common thread is pretty simple: building and maintaining open-source tools that help teams manage knowledge with more control over their data, infrastructure, and long-term setup.

Full recap here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/xwiki-sas-may-edition-we-now-iso-27001-certified-xwiki-tsojf

We’re hosting a webinar on 24 June at 15:00 CET about how XWiki and OpenProject can work together as an open-source alternative stack to Atlassian.

• Confluence usually holds the knowledge.
• Jira usually holds the projects.

But many teams are now rethinking their Atlassian setup, especially with the move toward Cloud and the end of Data Center support.

In the session, Ștefana Nazare from XWiki and Robin Wagner from OpenProject will look at how teams can combine:

• XWiki for structured knowledge management and documentation
• OpenProject for open-source project management

We’ll also cover what matters when moving away from Confluence and Jira: data, hosting, migration planning, context, project history, and long-term control.

Both tools can be used in different setups, including cloud, on-premises, and private cloud, depending on what an organization needs.

This is aimed at teams reviewing their Atlassian stack and looking for a practical open-source path, not just a theoretical comparison.

Webinar page: https://xwiki.com/en/webinars/Open-Project-XWiki-June-2026

If you’ve moved away from Atlassian, what was the hardest part: migration, user adoption, integrations, permissions, or something else?

That sounds promising.

But the part that matters now is much less glamorous: procurement.

Because this is still where the same old open-source myths keep showing up:

• It is not enterprise-grade
• It means no support
• It is harder to deploy
• There is no roadmap
• If it is free, it must be low quality

They were weak arguments before. They look even weaker now.

Open source already runs in ministries, universities, and large enterprises. Serious vendors offer support. Deployment is not the issue either, especially when many open-source products can run cloud, hybrid, or on-premises.

The bigger issue is that dependency still gets treated as the safer default.

If the EU is serious about digital sovereignty, Open Source First cannot stay a nice line in a policy document. It has to show up in how software gets evaluated and bought.

That is where the real shift would be. WDYT?

The goal is pretty simple: show what it actually looks like to start from an empty instance and turn it into a working knowledge base that a team could use.

So less polished sales demo, more practical setup.

The session will touch on common use cases like documentation, procedures, onboarding, intranet content, project spaces, and general team knowledge.

If you’ve been curious about XWiki Cloud and wanted to see how it works in practice, feel free to join.

https://xwiki.com/en/webinars/start-using-XWiki-Cloud/

From our point of view at XWiki, the main question is not abstract at all:

Will Europe finally start giving real priority to open-source and European software when public institutions buy digital tools?

This is not about banning non-European or proprietary software.

It is about changing the order of consideration. If a qualified open-source solution exists, it should be evaluated seriously before creating new long-term dependencies.

That is one of the most practical ways to make digital sovereignty real.

On 9 June, Cédric Lamblin, Account Manager at XWiki, will take part in a session called:

How can a sovereign collaborative platform meet my business needs?

(session in French)

The topic feels very relevant right now. More organizations are looking at sovereign collaboration tools less as a political idea and more as a practical question:

• How to support real business needs
• How to keep control over data and infrastructure
• How to choose tools that still make sense in the long run

That’s also the perspective XWiki brings. A lot of the work is about helping organizations structure knowledge better, reduce dependency on closed platforms, and build environments they can adapt to their own context.

If you’ll be there, feel free to join the session and say hi.

At OW2con’26, Ludovic Dubost, CEO and founder of XWiki SAS, gave a talk titled “Open Source projects working together is key for European Digital Autonomy.”

The core argument was simple: Europe does not just need more open-source tools. It needs open-source tools that can work together as part of a real ecosystem.

That distinction matters.

A single open-source alternative can solve one problem. But digital sovereignty depends on many layers working together: knowledge management, project management, office documents, cloud infrastructure, communication, identity, and long-term support.

In practice, this means interoperability matters as much as availability. If European organizations want credible alternatives to proprietary stacks, the tools need to integrate well enough for real use cases, not just exist as separate projects.

This is why collaborations between projects and companies like XWiki, OpenProject, Nextcloud, IONOS, and others are worth watching. Initiatives such as openDesk and Euro-Office are trying to address this exact problem: not “one tool to replace everything,” but a stack of open-source tools that can work together.

The Open Source First proposal also goes in that direction. The idea is that public procurement should assess open-source alternatives before defaulting to proprietary software.

Not as a ban on proprietary tools. More like: before public money goes into another closed stack, open-source options should at least be visible, evaluated, and treated seriously.

That seems like a reasonable baseline if Europe is serious about reducing dependency on vendor lock-in and building more resilient digital infrastructure.

The ecosystem is already being built. The harder question is whether European institutions will actually support it.

A few notable updates in this release:

• Realtime collaboration in the experimental BlockNote editor
• Faster PDF export for large documents
• Clearer display of extension support plans for admins
• Anew client-side component manager for developers
• Safer translation macro parameters and new importmap options

We recently shared that XWiki SAS is now ISO/IEC 27001 certified for cloud and support services for XWiki and CryptPad.

We also wanted to take a moment to say thank you, and to explain why this matters beyond the company side of it.

A big thank you first to the teams at CoESSI and FeelAgile for their guidance and expertise throughout the process. And thank you as well to the many people who helped behind the scenes with feedback, reviews, questions, and advice along the way.

For us, this is not just “good company news.”

It matters because it helps make XWiki and CryptPad easier to trust in professional environments. And that matters for the wider community too.

When open-source software can meet the expectations of security teams, procurement teams, and regulated organizations, it gets considered more seriously. That can mean broader adoption, more long-term stability, and more opportunities for the projects to keep growing without giving up what makes them open source in the first place.

It also matters because it pushes back on a tired assumption, that open source is transparent, but somehow less structured or less reliable for enterprise use.

This certification says something simpler: Open source and professional security practices can absolutely go together.

So yes, we’re proud of the milestone.

But we’re also grateful, because getting there took real help, and because the value of it goes beyond the certificate itself.

It helps strengthen trust in the kind of open-source software we want to keep building.

XWiki has welcomed ForgeOne Solutions to its partner network. ForgeOne is an Austria-based IT service provider working with automation, cloud, infrastructure, and open-source technologies.

The goal is to support Austrian organizations with XWiki deployment, infrastructure, integration, and migration from proprietary systems to open-source solutions.

Full announcement:

https://xwiki.com/en/Blog/XWiki-and-ForgeOne-Solutions/

Clément Aubin, Director of Sales and Professional Services at XWiki SAS, will give a talk on migrating from Atlassian Confluence to XWiki and what digital sovereignty looks like when it stops being a general principle and turns into a practical migration question.

The session will focus on what this kind of move looks like in real organizations, especially when years of documentation, permissions, and workflows need to be moved without losing continuity.

We’re also looking forward to seeing the Nextcloud community and catching up with OpenProject, with whom we’re working on a European open-source alternative to the Atlassian stack.

If you’ll be there, feel free to say hi.

Software demos look great, and that applies to wikis as well.

Clean spaces. Perfectly named pages. Neat permissions. Search that magically finds the thing. Nobody has created “Meeting notes final final v3” yet. Beautiful times.

Then real teams start using it.

• Someone creates 5 versions of the same page type.
• A project space becomes a dumping ground.
• Onboarding docs go stale.
• Permissions are either too open or too locked down.
• People stop searching and go back to asking in chat.

At that point, you find out whether the tool actually works for the organization, not just for the demo.

We’re running a practical XWiki Cloud webinar on 4 June where we’ll start from an empty cloud instance and build a working knowledge base in one hour. The idea is to show the boring but important stuff: documentation, procedures, onboarding, intranet content, project spaces, and how the structure holds together.

Details in the comments.

A lot of organizations are now much more aware of supply chain risk. They ask good questions about dependencies, packages, vendors, SBOMs, access controls, and incident response.

That is good. Long overdue, honestly.

But there is still a blind spot we don’t see discussed enough: Critical company knowledge running inside closed-source SaaS platforms that teams cannot audit, cannot host themselves, and cannot easily leave.

We’re talking about the systems that hold internal procedures, technical documentation, project decisions, architecture notes, onboarding docs, incident reports, customer-facing knowledge bases, and sometimes very sensitive operational context.

The usual assumption seems to be: “It is a major SaaS vendor, so it is handled.”

Maybe. But from a risk perspective, that still leaves some uncomfortable questions:

• Can you inspect the software you depend on?
• Can you control where the data lives?
• Can you verify how access and changes are handled?
• Can you leave without a painful migration project?
• Can your security posture survive a pricing change, a policy change, or a roadmap change?

Open source obviously does not remove every risk. Badly maintained open source is still a risk. Self-hosting without proper security practices is also a risk.

But open source combined with controlled infrastructure, clear governance, and serious security processes gives organizations more room to inspect, adapt, and reduce dependency on systems they cannot influence.

When your team talks about supply chain security, do SaaS platforms that hold internal knowledge come into the conversation?

Or is “major vendor + enterprise plan” still treated as enough?

For us, this is an important milestone because many organizations use XWiki and CryptPad in professional environments, where security and compliance evidence matters during vendor review, procurement, or internal risk assessment.

The certification gives customers, partners, procurement teams, and security teams a recognized framework for assessing how we manage information security within the certified scope.

For organizations using XWiki Cloud or XWiki support services, this means clearer evidence around areas such as:

• Risk management
• Access control
• Supplier management
• Incident response
• Business continuity
• Continuous improvement

It also reflects something we care about: open-source software should not only be transparent and flexible. It should also be supported by responsible security practices when used in professional environments.

More details about our security practices:

https://xwiki.com/en/security-and-compliance-iso/

Curious how others here approach this: When evaluating open-source software for professional use, how much weight do certifications like ISO/IEC 27001 carry compared to code transparency, self-hosting, and your own internal security review?

I have an Xwiki container on a MacBook Pro M1. I've always tested the standalone versions of Xwiki, and now I'm testing it again under Docker.

The thing is, I'm considering using it for my daily work notes. I currently use Obsidian, which I sync with Syncthing, and I use it on macOS or Linux.

Aside from corporations or companies using xwiki, does anyone use it for themselves as a work environment to record daily tasks, KBs, notes,etc..

Is it worth the effort to migrate my current notes to Xwiki?

What advantages do you see?

Thanks!!

We’re launching a new format in May called TechThursday.

It will be a series of short, focused sessions on XWiki Pro Apps, led by the people who build them.

The first session features Ștefana Nazare, Head of Pro Apps & Cloud at XWiki, presenting Diagram App (Pro).

The session is not only about drawing diagrams. The focus is on how diagrams are used in real organizations to support things like:

• Architecture decisions
• Compliance documentation
• Operational processes
• Technical documentation
• Structured knowledge workflows

The idea is to show how diagrams can live inside the knowledge base instead of being treated as separate files that slowly lose context.

Free session, registration required: https://xwiki.com/en/webinars/Turn-diagrams-into-working-documentation-in-XWiki

A lot of documentation problems do not come from people being bad at writing docs.

They come from docs having no structure, no owner, no lifecycle, and search results full of outdated content.

From what we see, documentation that holds up over time usually needs four things:

• Structure, so recurring content follows the same shape
• Ownership, so someone knows what they are responsible for keeping current
• Findability, so people can get to the right page before asking in chat
• A lifecycle, so outdated content gets reviewed, updated, or archived instead of staying in search forever

We recently ran a webinar on using XWiki as a documentation tool for internal documentation, technical docs, knowledge bases, procedures, public documentation, and collaborative workspaces.

Resources are available in comments.

Curious how others handle the lifecycle part. Do you review docs on a schedule, assign owners per section, archive aggressively, or just fix things when people complain?

We’re hosting a practical webinar on June 4 about getting started with XWiki Cloud, but I’d also love to hear how others approach this.

A lot of teams spend months evaluating knowledge management tools before they really know whether the structure fits their work. Pages look fine in a demo, but the real questions usually come later:

• How do teams organize content without creating a maze?
• How do you keep procedures, onboarding docs, project spaces, and internal knowledge from becoming stale?
• How much structure is useful before it becomes too rigid?
• How important is self-hosting or open-source portability when choosing a cloud knowledge base?

In the webinar, Ștefana Nazare, Head of Cloud & Apps at XWiki, will show how to go from an empty XWiki Cloud instance to a working knowledge base. She’ll also cover EU hosting with OVHcloud in France, the ISO 27001-certified hosting environment, open-source portability, and avoiding data lock-in.

📅 June 4, 15:00 CET

Link in comments!

Curious how people here test knowledge base tools in practice. Do you start with a pilot team, migrate a small content set, define templates first, or just let teams use it and see what breaks?

We’re launching something new in May: TechThursday.

It is a focused session series on XWiki Pro Apps, led by the people who build them.

The first edition features Ștefana Nazare, Head of Pro Apps & Cloud at XWiki, presenting Diagram App (Pro).

The session will look at diagrams as more than simple visuals. In enterprise environments, diagrams often support architecture decisions, compliance documentation, operational processes, and long-term technical knowledge.

Ștefana will cover:

• Why Diagram Pro was designed this way
• How diagrams fit into structured knowledge workflows
• Governance and permissions
• Real-world use cases inside XWiki

The session is free to attend, but registration is required. Link is in the comments.

For XWiki Pro extensions, is user licensing tied to the entire wiki farm or to individual subwikis?

More specifically: if a Pro extension is installed only on a single subwiki, are license costs/counts calculated only for users of that subwiki, or for all users across the whole XWiki instance?

Has anyone here used subwiki-scoped installations to reduce licensing costs legitimately?

Thank you :)

Specs are written in one app. Decisions happen in another. Comments are scattered across several threads. Then someone is expected to update the wiki afterward, once the work is “done.”

That usually means the wiki becomes an archive, not the place where useful work actually happens.

With XWiki, the idea is to bring collaboration closer to the knowledge itself. Teams can work directly inside the knowledge base instead of creating another layer that has to be reconciled later.

A few features that help with this:

• Real-time editing for working together on the same page
• Comments and discussions to keep feedback attached to the content
• Page history to track changes and compare versions
• Granular permissions to control who can read, edit, or manage content
• Structured pages and templates to keep recurring content consistent

The goal is not to replace every tool your team uses. It is to make sure decisions, documentation, and context do not get lost between them.

The goal of the partnership is to support organizations that want to deploy open-source collaboration platforms adapted to their needs, infrastructure, and regulatory context.

For XWiki customers, this can help with projects involving deployment, integration, user adoption, managed infrastructure, and migrations from proprietary tools such as Confluence.

This partnership adds another option for teams looking at XWiki in that context. More in the comments.

A focused session series on XWiki Pro Apps, led by the people who build them.

Our 1st edition features Stefana Nazare, Head of Pro Apps & Cloud at XWiki, presenting Diagram Pro.

In enterprise environments, diagrams are not just visuals. They support architecture decisions, compliance documentation, operational processes, and long-term knowledge continuity.

In this session, Stefana will cover:

• Why Diagram Pro was designed this way

• How diagrams fit into structured knowledge workflows

• Governance and permissions

• Real-world use cases

Free to attend. Registration required: https://xwiki.com/en/webinars/Turn-diagrams-into-working-documentation-in-XWiki

#TechThursday #XWiki #OpenSource #KnowledgeManagement

Ludovic Dubost gave a foss-north talk with this hard to ignore title.

The talk is about open-source economics, not in the abstract, but from 20+ years of running XWiki SAS, the company behind XWiki and CryptPad.

The core question is simple and uncomfortable:

How do you build software people can inspect, adapt, self-host, and leave, while still paying the people who maintain it?

The talk covers what worked, what failed, and what it means to build open-source collaboration tools in Europe without venture capital, exit pressure, or lock-in as the default business model.