On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Ryan Prior <[email protected]> wrote:
> So first: is there a* compelling and inarguable* reason to use a >> different platform? >> > > Yeah, Drupal is huge and centralized and requires a decent amount of > webmastering. We just need: code and document version control, wiki-like > and blog-like structures for sharing organized opinions and documentation, > eventually bug triage, defect tracking, resolution management, etc. as we > hope the project will outgrow one moderate-volume mailing list. fossil-scm > does those things better than drupal because it is a package focused on > supporting scrappy software projects like this. Its focus is on simplicity > of deployment and maintenance, decentralization, collaboration, > reliability, and attention paid to the needs of developers. ( > http://www.fossil-scm.org) > Ryan: As I thought I made clear in my initial note, we need a good bit more than that. I have run fossil and I agree that it is pretty good. The SQLite folks have used it very effectively. But, as you say, Fossil is focused on a narrow set of goals. It is very good at those goals, but we (PixelFab) need some things that Fossil doesn't do. Most notably in the areas of documents and workflows. To be clear: I'm not a big fan of Drupal, and I'm also not a big fan of Joomla. But we need more than Fossil provides. shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
