116
$\begingroup$

I personally use a revision control system (git) to manage my own paper writing, back things up, and synchronize between different machines. However, I've found most programmer's revision control systems to require a bit too much training to try and push on a co-author for the purposes of working on a joint paper.

Are there any people out there using software tools to help handle joint writing? How successful have they been?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 11
    $\begingroup$ Stay with git, it is most advanced revision control system. $\endgroup$
    – psihodelia
    Mar 30, 2010 at 12:45
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ the one thing currently really lacking from making git et al perfect is a diff algorithm that breaks up latex text into the correct "semantic" chunks for comparing different version of the same file. However, considering the relatively small number of folks typically collaboratively writing a paper, thats a nonissue overall. $\endgroup$ Apr 19, 2010 at 2:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @C.T.Schonwald: do you know about git diff --color-words? $\endgroup$ Aug 25, 2010 at 11:11
  • $\begingroup$ This discussion stackoverflow.com/questions/187064/graphical-diff-for-mac-os-x gives lots of graphical diff programs for the Mac, for people who do not love the command line. FileMerge/OpenDiff works well for me, even though it doesn't know anything about latex. $\endgroup$
    – Skip
    Sep 19, 2010 at 23:58
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ 6.5 years later (!) -- I've been using Bitbucket. It hosts the repository for you, so that you don't have to mess with Dropbox or bug the sysadmins or maintain anything yourself. You can upload changes to files and browse through them through their website, or do it at the commandline instead. Their accounts are free, and if you're an academic they let you have an unlimited number of (private) projects going at the same time (which was one obstruction to doing the same with Github). $\endgroup$ Jul 3, 2016 at 21:01

24 Answers 24

33
$\begingroup$

I've been using Dropbox for a while. It works like this: You sign up at their webpage for free to get 2gb space which you can access via their webinterface. If you want (and this is the novel part) you can install their software, which sets up a folder on your computer which is automatically (and in the background) synchronized with their server. You can share folders with other dropbox users. Underlying their system is a modified version of svn (I think), and you can go back to revisions via their webinterface. I don't know how concurrent editing is handled.

There are some features missing (selective synching, branching, milestones) but overall it's an awesome free service. The software is very well done and not distracting, I am synching folders from my office computer (linux) with my home computer (windows xp) and it works like a charm.

$\endgroup$
10
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Yes, dropbox is great. BUT it does not make the DIFFerence (you have to compare older files on your computer --- download both and use some DIFF-editor) $\endgroup$ Jan 10, 2010 at 18:51
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Lars: concurrent editing creates multiple copies upon synchronization. $\endgroup$ Jun 23, 2010 at 3:27
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @DropBox users : Don't you think it is an issue to give all your research papers for free to a private company ? $\endgroup$
    – Lierre
    Feb 27, 2012 at 10:03
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ @Lierre: way less of an issue than giving the paper copyright for free to publishers who put it behind a paywall, which is still the norm for most scientists :-( $\endgroup$ Jun 28, 2013 at 2:33
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I loathe Dropbox for collaborative editing (it's fine for other purposes e.g. synchronizing some of my files between multiple computers). My preferred tool is git. But my experience is that combinations of git and Dropbox are worse than either one alone for potential data-losing screwups, and for creating messes that require a lot of hand-editing to clean up. Use one or the other alone, not both at once. $\endgroup$ Oct 26, 2016 at 21:23
25
$\begingroup$

I've been using svn for all my papers for about a year, and I can't imagine not using some kind of version control now. I've had no problem with getting coauthors to use it, though I don't have any technophobe collaborators.

The disadvantage of Dropbox (much as I love it for other things) is that it's not so good for simultaneous editing; no easy way to merge commits. You also don't get to keep a complete revision history with comments.

I'm less convinced of the value of Google Wave so far; real time typing is almost a distraction, and if I want to discuss math in real time I'm usually best off using the phone, I find.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Yes -- I had no problem adapting when one of my collaborators suggested using svn. $\endgroup$
    – D. Savitt
    Oct 28, 2009 at 17:45
  • $\begingroup$ svn is less attractive than distributed version control (DVC) for simultaneous editing: people shouldn't have to create branches to commit changes that haven't yet incorporated other people's edits. Generally authors and editors want to accept or reject other people's edits in a few at a time, while creating their own changes: DVC allows this, svn makes it hard. $\endgroup$ Mar 30, 2010 at 10:10
  • $\begingroup$ I'm also using svn, but it is installed internally in my office and cannot be accessed in any way by external collaborators. Do you know a free acces svn on the web (such as google code but without the open access ...) $\endgroup$ Jul 27, 2010 at 6:50
  • $\begingroup$ xp-dev.com works for me. $\endgroup$
    – TSG
    Aug 18, 2010 at 20:10
  • $\begingroup$ @TG: what is your protocol for convincing a collaborator to use SVN? Do you ask them to install TortoiseSVN or some other GUI? $\endgroup$ Aug 25, 2010 at 11:13
20
$\begingroup$

There is a tool that is very promising, it is called ScribTeX, The free collaborative LaTeX editor. Its description is giving

Welcome to ScribTeX, the online collaborative LaTeX editor. ScribTeX allows you to work on LaTeX documents from anywhere with internet access and share them with your friends and colleagues easily. You can:

* Create and edit LaTeX documents and automatically render them to PDFs;
* View a complete revision history of all your files;
* Keep your documents private, allow people of your choosing to view or edit them, or publish them to world;
* Use BibTeX to keep track of your references and include them in LaTeX documents;
* Upload images and include them in your LaTeX documents;
* Create custom style files and use them in your LaTeX documents.

Hope this can help many of us doing better collaborative work.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is it possible (and convenient) to use non-standard packages? $\endgroup$
    – Josh
    Nov 11, 2009 at 16:30
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, you can upload any style files you like. $\endgroup$ Dec 27, 2009 at 11:43
  • $\begingroup$ I've found this extremely useful. I don't use it for collaboration, but it has allowed me to often leave my laptop at home and use the abundant campus computer clusters. $\endgroup$ Sep 20, 2010 at 5:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Moreover, in ScribTeX you can access your projects with git: support.scribtex.com/entries/… $\endgroup$ Aug 30, 2012 at 18:29
  • $\begingroup$ ScribTex no longer exists. furthermore its replacement is paid, free account does not allow collaborators. $\endgroup$
    – Rho Phi
    Mar 24, 2017 at 13:25
20
$\begingroup$

One tool that works better than diff (in my opinion) is latexdiff http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/support/latexdiff/ . The advantage is that the result is a tex file with the deleted text struck-out and the added text underlined. It also uses color. the reason this is nice is for collaborating with people that don't want to use your version control method. once you get the file back from them you simply commit it to the repository and then use latexdiff-vc to see the differences. One of my collaborators likes writing latex in one long line (one line per paragraph) so using regular diff is almost useless with him....

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I have had good experiences using this in my editing work with clients. Latexdiff works well together with distributed version control, allowing two or more people to work on a document side-by-side. I'd love to see a latex3diff, to handle 3-way diffs. $\endgroup$ Mar 30, 2010 at 10:03
14
$\begingroup$

I use bzr (any particular reason why git, by the way?) and I've ended up using it for just about everything: papers, seminars, teaching, configuration files, my entire website, just about everything I do on a computer is in a bzr repository. Although I've yet to convince any collaborator to use it as well, I still find that it makes life easier since I can easily keep a record of when I sent something to someone else and merge in changes against that particular revision. I can also publish a repository and make it easy for a collaborator to have access to the files without needing to use bzr themselves.

Within a paper, I use the changes.sty package for sharing comments back and forth between myself and a collaborator.

Bzr has "nice" frontends so it might be possible to persuade a non-technologically minded person to use it (I'm a commandline junkie so have no experience of the available GUIs).

I also use a wiki (nlab, naturally) but that is (at the moment) for less focussed projects than a specific paper. However, when writing anything substantial there then I do it "offline" (even so far as to "compiling" and viewing it) and only sending it into the ether when I'm happy with it.

I find it completely incomprehensible that people want everything to be "in the cloud". I have access to several high-powered computers which are capable of running whatever software I'm using incredibly fast. Why would I swap that for a slow, crackly internet link which is guaranteed to be down the one time that I really need it? By using a DVCS (distributed version control system), I only need to be connected to the internet at the start of a given session and I can get my files off any one of a number of machines so it doesn't matter if one or other is down. In the worst case scenario that I can't connect, I can work offline on something and then merge my changes back again later. Indeed, my entire DVCS currently takes up a mere 71Mb (of which 25Mb consists of my local copies of Instiki and xournal) so I could easily carry it around with me on a memory stick (encrypted, of course).

If I really did want to do some "real time" collaboration, I would use either gobby (for working on files or papers) or jarnal (for working on maths). Gobby has real-time editing (and has had for quite some time) whilst with jarnal I can use my graphics tablet to actually write the mathematics for the other person to see just as if we were at a blackboard together. After all, if I'm doing real-time collaboration then I don't want to bother with getting the LaTeX syntax exactly right. I'm not bad at TeX, but if I'm in "Math Mode" then I don't want to be bothering with it.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ I use git because I'm a commandline junkie myself, and it just happened to be what I found when I was looking for something that didn't require a centralized repository (it was the "new thing" at the time). It's fit well into my workflow so I've kept it. $\endgroup$ Oct 28, 2009 at 19:45
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, exactly the same as bzr for me. $\endgroup$ Oct 28, 2009 at 20:25
  • $\begingroup$ @Andrew : I found this very helpful. Instiki was pleasantly easy to install. My one frustration with instiki is that it interprets < and > as MathML. Do you know how I can tell it to use <> as literal characters inside of equations? I am not in the habit of using \gt and \lt. [sorry to resurrect something so old] $\endgroup$
    – Sam Lisi
    May 6, 2011 at 15:11
  • $\begingroup$ Sam, Instiki interprets < and > that way because it is allowed to put in literal XHTML in to the source. That makes it particularly easy to use SVG, for instance. I've actually written a program to convert simple LaTeX to iTeX+Markdown and it converts < and > to \lt and \gt (see my homepage for details, or send me an email). $\endgroup$ May 6, 2011 at 18:24
  • $\begingroup$ (Incidentally, Sam, notifications don't work on comments here as they do in SE, so feel free to continue this by email if you wish, or on the nForum.) $\endgroup$ May 6, 2011 at 18:32
13
$\begingroup$

There is a new project called Sharelatex the website is www.sharelatex.com

It is a web application where the collaborators can edit the text at the same time. We can get a free account to test the software.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It’s worth adding that ShareLaTeX is now a very mature site. On the plus side, its editing interface is now extremely powerful, full-featured and well-designed — good enough that I think I could be happy using it as my standard editor. And it makes collaboration extremely smooth — much easier than (say) github if your co-authors aren’t tech-savvy enough, and much better for simultaneous editing than (say) Dropbox. Unfortunately, some big features (e.g. full version history access) are only available with a paid subscription. $\endgroup$ May 9, 2017 at 15:23
13
$\begingroup$

Overleaf.com (previously WriteLaTeX) is a service that lets you edit & compile latex in the browser, with real-time edit merging.
It's comparable to ShareLaTeX.com. Notable differences (some unchecked since 2013):

  • ShareLaTeX is mostly open source. Easy to self-host on Sandstorm.

  • Overleaf doesn't require signup => Less friction when convincing collaborators to try it, just send them the URL and they can edit.

  • Overleaf's embedded preview uses images (fast but blurry), ShareLaTeX uses PDF.js. Both allow PDF download, of course.

  • both save history, can show diffs.

    • Overleaf free plan doesn't save full history, only when you explicitly create a version ?
    • ShareLaTeX has a Track Changes mode letting you later reject/accept them.
  • both have some spell checking and auto-complete.

  • ShareLaTeX.com on paid plans has 2-way Dropbox sync allowing some offline/local editing (though only for one user; I tried it and wasn't impressed). WriteLaTeX only has 1-way backup to dropbox.

  • ShareLaTeX.com on paid plans has [sync with Github](https://www.sharelatex.com/blog/2015/02/10/sharelatex-github-sync.html; Overleaf supports direct Git access.

  • Overleaf has "rich text" mode somewhat resembling LyX. Constructs such as sections, bullet lists, math are typeset inside the source.

  • Both have UI for adding/replying/closing comments. In Overleaf those are part of the source so the UI only applies in rich text mode.

  • both embedded chat, with math rendering.

  • both have forward/reverse search (SyncTeX)

  • Overleaf seems to work better on Android & iOS. UPDATE: unclear, Android typing in Overleaf is also problematic as of 2016. I think the only way I ever got it to work acceptably on Android was with external keyboard?

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

This may not be exactly what your looking for, but people are using wiki's to collaboratively write papers. Polymath collaborations are discussed on this blog. And recently a collaborative paper was posted on arXiv from people working on the polymath wiki. This is joint writing taken to the limit.

*New users can only post one link! Sorry, my links to the paper and blog were removed *

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ You can add the links back in as regular text. $\endgroup$ Mar 30, 2010 at 10:05
5
$\begingroup$

How about a wiki?

Every collaboration has its own personality, so I am sure there is no best-for-everyone solution to this question.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Google Wave does have a robot called watexy that can add maths into conversations. Once you've added it you put LaTeX commands inbetween double $$ signs and it automatically replaces it with an image.

Useful for a maths chat but by no means usable for hacking together a paper or a proof that you can later cut and paste into a proper LaTeX document.

It's a start though.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Just to add to Jon Awbrey's generous plug for my wiki website, MyWikiBiz... I am currently working behind the scenes with Dr. Martin Hepp who heads the e-business & web science research group at the Universitaet der Bundeswehr Muenchen, to implement the "GoodRelations" semantic properties to our site, which will hopefully organize and streamline a host of semantic data fields (attributes and relations). It will be geared more toward business information, but I'm just pointing out that I am actively willing to collaborate with research/university initiatives to make MyWikiBiz your academic workshop, even if for simply testing out ontologies or collaboration styles. -- Gregory Kohs

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

For joint collaboration I've used subversion. Having a central repository I think is a really good idea for a paper, although you can set up central repositories in bzr and git.

I would stay away from git for two reasons, however. First, Windows support doesn't seem to me that great. You have to either use something like Cygwin or the port, which is hardly optimal. Unfortunately many people use Windows. The second is that it's a bit harder to use git. I love git myself but subversion is straightforward: there's commit (and conflict), whereas with git you have a local repository you can commit to and then you can also push to a remote repository.

In the end I like subversion for collaborative efforts. The only downside is if you really like to branch your work, then subversion is horrible compared to git or bzr. Bzr and svn also have nice version numbers ;)

$\endgroup$
6
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Isn't that an argument for staying away from Windows? $\endgroup$
    – GMRA
    Nov 11, 2009 at 20:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If only git were a sufficient reason to convince people to stop using Windows. $\endgroup$ Nov 11, 2009 at 20:46
  • $\begingroup$ do you use a web repository? or just your own personal one from your laptop/PC? $\endgroup$
    – Jose Capco
    Nov 13, 2009 at 8:58
  • $\begingroup$ I used OpenSVN in the past but apparently that service was abused and now full so it's not an option now. If you're using SVN you can get your IT department to set up a server, but if I'm not mistaken if you use bzr you can just push to a remote branch without having a daemon running, so you can use your existing web space via sftp. $\endgroup$ Nov 13, 2009 at 20:44
  • $\begingroup$ I've been using subversion with a co-author for a few years now. It's very nice, but I don't have anything to compare it to. It's certainly much easier than dealing with everything by e-mail. $\endgroup$ Dec 5, 2009 at 6:25
5
$\begingroup$

Sadly, I haven't collaborated yet.. but I would use svn for collaboration. If it's supposed to be a top-secret collaboration, then I'd go for a commercial web svn repository (lots out there that are very cheap). If you think no one could really steal the work from you or that it's ok for people to read it, I would use a free svn repository. The pain is when your partner isn't a techy person, you can't even ask him to merge new versions of works with some sort of merger.. you are supposed to do all the merging from his end.

As for myself, I would not use svn. I usually have papers 15 pages long or so, and I just keep backups everytime I make a milestone and then zip the whole thing (like every month or so).. in case something goes wrong I go back to the backup, it's like a small scale inefficient svn.. but you don't want to kill a bird with an atomic bomb. Always worked for me, I'm not sure for writing books.. probably an svn would become necessary, but I won't be suprised if my backup technique work as well.. it worked for my PhD dissertation anyway :p

EDIT: Most of us mathematician wouldn't have our entire .tex work exceeding 200Mb. For that I would recommend the svn web repositories like (these support closed source, i.e. private projects): XP-Dev and Unfuddle These two are free if you don't exceed 200Mb and you can choose to have the project (you are allowed max 2 or 1 projects for these free repositories.. but I would just keep them in one big folder and name them as 1 project). I like the look and feel of Unfuddle, but XP-Dev isn't that bad either. The advantage of SVN is that it caters for both windows and linux users (for windows I'd recommend TortoiseSVN Client). In case you exceed the 200Mb (which for our purpose is hardly believable.. unless you have lots of images in your LaTeX documents), then I would recommend Assembla because it's very cheap (like \$3/Month/user + \$0.3/100Mb/User) and reliable and you can buy as much space as you want.

$\endgroup$
0
5
$\begingroup$

I use svn even for my papers with no coauthors. I have a repository at my department that gets backed up frequently, and I can have a copy of the repository on any machine in the world. It keeps track of changes and I know exactly which version was sent to the journal or arxive.org, etc. It allows for simultaneous edits by the collaborators. It is also easy to learn, at least the basics.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Gist is very useful for initial writeup of ideas. Allows to create a git repository for a small file instantly. Anyone can edit the file and save (commit) a new version. Does not allow branching -- only the newest version is editable. Registration is not necessary, but useful.

Feel free to edit this gist.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

People who like MediaWiki or Semantic MediaWiki might look into the facilities at MyWikiBiz. This is a "directory" site that operates on a 2-level model. There are mainspace pages that can be edited by anyone — these are supposed to be verifiable and so on. Then there are author-owned directory pages that only the author and sysops can edit — these are free to be anything within bounds of ethical and legal reason. Collaborative work is possible via the discussion pages and any number of user subpages that you want to create, where a group can hash out a draft and then have the principal or responsible author copy the latest authorized version to the directory page for the paper. I haven't used the Semantic MW and ASK Query features all that much, but they are there for the asking.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

A (distributed) version control system which has a solid theoretical background, unlike most others, is darcs (originally written by a physicist). Unfortunately it does not have a nice user interface yet, so it may be not easy to "force" your coauthors to use it...

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm using darcs to coauthor a paper at the moment. Perhaps I'm lucky to have a collaborator who's willing to learn new things outside the usual realm. $\endgroup$
    – Tom Ellis
    Apr 20, 2011 at 12:21
4
$\begingroup$

Crocodoc is a new site that has helped me collaborate on already-written papers.
For document generation, Etherpad is still my favorite collaborative text editor by far.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

The Online LaTeX Editor is a browser based LaTeX editor solution that supports collaboration. You can easily share projects with other users by simply choosing the project you want to share and enter the username of the collaborator.

Maybe an alternative to traditional tools like LED et al.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ This actually looks amazingly good. First online LaTeX editor I can actually imagine using. $\endgroup$ Apr 20, 2011 at 15:45
4
$\begingroup$

One more vote for old trusted CVS here. Actually, I use OpenCVS since my OS of choice is OpenBSD.

I would like to bring to attention of SVN users the package svn-multi, which allows you to create (TeX) log messages on the LaTeX document itself. There is another package for using SVN with LaTeX called svn. Disadvantage of svn is that is not playing well with the papers which are broken into multiple files. Here are couple very good articles from the PracTeX journal about SVN, LaTeX and even using it with TextMate:

  1. Kalderon - LaTeX and Subversion;

  2. Skiadas, Kjosmoen, and Kalderon - Subversion and TextMate;

  3. Scharrer - Version control of LaTeX documents with svn-multi.

Another interesting reading from the same issue of PracTeX Journal is Henningsen - Tools for collaborative writing of scientific LaTeX documents, which addresses the original question.

I am not a big fun of distributed revision control systems like Git. If I would have to pick one distributed system it would be Mercurial.

I would like to point out another issue. Traditional revision control systems are intended to be used with text files (source codes). Most classical revision control systems like CVS and SVN have troubles dealing with binary files. TeX files are of course text files. However, illustrations in papers, unless created with programming languages like PSTricks, MetaPost, PGF/TikZ, or Asymptote, are binary files. So they are not playing well with revision control system. That is one more reason for young mathematicians to start programming their illustrations instead of creating them with vector graphics editor like Xfig. My favorite is PSTricks because it is essentially the easiest way to use pure PostScript inside TeX documents. As we all know, PostScript is the page description language. Therefore, I also have strong preference for Powerdot (PSTricks) over Beamer (PGF/TikZ).

Unfortunately, there is a disturbing trend at least when it comes to grant proposals of using proprietary binary formats like doc. Those formats do not play well with revision control systems which makes collaboration on grant writing very painful. Hopefully, as the "new" docx format, which is the default format of MS Office 2007, becomes more widespread, this problem will slowly disappear. (At least for the people that are familiar that docx is just bunch of XML files zipped together, only two of the files are actually important, one being an XML version of document itself and another being a Style Sheet file. People familiar with DocBook (apparently MS people were not one of them since they reinvented the wheel invented 1992) will know what I am talking about.)

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Authorea is an online social authoring platform for the collaborative writing of research articles. Its versioning control system is entirely based on Git (every article is a Git repository). But Git functions in the backend, so that users who are not familiar with (or do not care about) Git can just use it as an editor and still have all changes logged as commits. In other words, Authorea allows power users (who know Git) to easily write papers in collaboration with regular users (who don't know Git). Authorea's frontend allows you to enter text in LaTeX or Markdown, as well as figures, and equations (in LaTeX or MathML). Authorea renders and compiles everything to the web (HTML5), in addition to PDF (export to numerous journal formats is provided).

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

I've heard that the reason people like Google Wave is precisely because it makes collaboration easy. I don't have experience with it, though; perhaps somebody who has used it can comment?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ I just started using it - envisioning mathematical collaboration as my main mode of usage. Not enough time put into it to be able to tell how good or bad it will turn out though. It sure feels promising at this point, though. $\endgroup$ Oct 28, 2009 at 15:06
  • $\begingroup$ Congratulations for getting in :) Is Latex support working, and if so, is it working well? $\endgroup$
    – Lars
    Oct 28, 2009 at 16:21
  • $\begingroup$ I'm very excited about Google Wave, but it's certainly not at the point where I would want to write an entire paper in it. For the purpose of writing a paper, I don't think real-time collaboration is valuable enough to outweigh the advantages of the existing infrastructure (e.g., chances are you greatly prefer your favorite editor to the one in the Google's Wave client running in your browser). It could already be quite useful for talking about your paper while writing it, though. $\endgroup$ Oct 28, 2009 at 19:11
  • $\begingroup$ I'm actively using google wave with several different people. It's fabuluous -- I don't think it makes any sense for actually writing papers at this point, but it seems to be uniformly better than IM for discussing maths. $\endgroup$ Oct 29, 2009 at 3:51
  • $\begingroup$ Agreed. I use it for collaboration, but only for bouncing ideas off of a collaborator and keeping a log of these ideas, not for the actual writing of the paper. (ScribTex above looks promising for that aspect). Think of it as half-way between instant messaging and email. $\endgroup$ Jan 28, 2010 at 17:24
2
$\begingroup$

On most papers it is far easier to coordinate your efforts by email than it is to learn svn or whatever. But I think the best is yet to come and it will be part of the class of tools being pioneered by scribtex.com verbosus.com and docs.latexlab.org. Take any of these and add -ftp or similarly convenient uploading, -some kind of guarantee of relative security/privacy, -inline preview like auctex and finally (fingers crossed), -compile with server or local TeX installations -offline mode. Those things combined will be very compelling with the added bonus of not having to install anything.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

For years, I've used CVS to mediate collaborative writing of grant proposals and technical reports with others. I highly recommend this approach to anyone who is interested in collaborative work with faculty and student collaborators, whether they be local or distant.

Most of our writing has been in a LaTeX environment, which is a barrier to participation for folks who aren't used to that markup. I anticipate moving to Markdown or HTML to bring in collaborators who aren't LaTeX-savvy, provided I can find ways to author MathML when mathematical notation is necessary.

Looking ahead, I want to transition to Git as it will allow local commits for each author in their own copy of the repository. What I haven't figured out is how to manage the 'pushing' and 'merging' of changes made by each collaborator to each of the collaborator's local repository.

$\endgroup$
1

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.