On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:26:20PM -0500, Joshua Paine wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 11:46 -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote:
> > If the feature were put in wouldn't it just be "people with old fossil
> > needing to update"?
> 
> Yes, but...
> 
> > I'm not sure I get why there's talk of "custom fossil". This is a
> > feature that a overwhelming majority want.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 Let us please keep a context when using loaded phrases such as 

   "overwhelming majority want".

 I believe the context for the phrase is a straw poll which 
 was taken by approximately twenty people who subscribe
 to this mailing list.  Likely there are more people
 than myself who subscribe and did not vote.

 My unsupported-by-evidence belief is that there are
 magnitudes more people who use fossil than the twenty
 or so votes in the straw poll.  I doubt that we can
 accurately extrapolate all users' sentiments from
 that poll.  A download counter at fossil-scm.org
 may provide a sense of how much fossil is used (of
 course, each download does not necessarily indicate
 a new user or users).


 The current fossil wiki and embedded documentation are
 fine by me.  If people want to add to their own "stuff",
 they have that capability.  

 I most especially would want never to see, e.g. javascript
 as a mandatory part of using fossil.  Many scripting languages,
 and javascript particularly, are great holes for inserting
 code to compromise a machine via the web browser.

 I prefer my source control management system to present
 as few risks as possible for code corruption, undesired
 distribution, or compromise of my users' machines when
 using the SCM.  No doubt I am not alone with that sentiment.


~Michael


> 
> But it's a feature that DRH said some time ago on the fossil site that
> he considered and rejected, and since he has stayed out of this
> conversation, I conclude that he's sticking to his decision or at best
> will reconsider only if some working code appears.
> 
> If one were to implement markdown or some other more complete text
> formatting language in C, DRH might still not be willing to include it,
> so that route means hoping DRH will change his mind, or settling for a
> custom version of fossil.
> 
> -- 
> Joshua Paine  
> LetterBlock: Web applications built with joy  
> http://letterblock.com/  
> 301-576-1920
> 
> _______________________________________________
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

-- 
Michael McDaniel
Portland, Oregon, USA
http://trip.autosys.us

_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Reply via email to