On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Konstantin Khomoutov < flatw...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> I do understand the rationale for this approach; if I were the author > of Fossil (I'm incapable for this, but let's pretend I am, for the > moment) I'd probably pick the same approach during an early phase of > development. Now it seems that quite many users see overly simple > markup capabilities of the Fossil's wiki engine to be a problem; a > soultion exists and is even integrated. > Another consideration here is that the wiki has kind of fallen out of use, with the embedded docs system generally being preferred. While i admit that i pay a good deal of attention to fossil's wiki API (i've added several of the wiki subcommands and the wiki API was amongst the first of the JSON APIs added), i will admit that embedded docs are generally a better solution. But the wiki is just too convenient (which is the only reason anyone really uses a wiki, anyway). Once i get embedded docs support in the JSON API, i probably won't touch the wiki API again. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
