On Tue, 2014-04-15 at 18:03 -0500, Nick Daly wrote: > ST <smn...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Hi Nick, > > > > if no CMS was integrated yet - I suggest to use Fossil > > ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_(software) ) instead of Ikiwiki. I > > took a look on Ikiwiki and realized that Fossil covers almost all > > Ikiwiki features but offers much more. It is small (only one file), fast > > (written in C) and is tuned for security. > > > > What does the public think? > > > > http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/tip/www/index.wiki > > The only thing I really don't like about Fossil for projects is that the > wiki and the bug reports aren't hosted as files within the repository, > making them impossible to check out without *using* Fossil. I had a > not-very-good workaround for this in Publish [0], which just tracks all > separate artifacts as files (in particular root-level directories). > Then, it's easy to cross-publish between multiple hosting sites. It's > also trivial to offer a read-only view of the entire repository (code + > data + metadata) and make the whole thing downloadable as an archive. > It could be a lot more flexible and easier to use (I'll update it to > host multiple projects some day), but that said, not everybody cares > about those sorts of things and Fossil's really nice. > > Nick > > 0: https://gitorious.org/project-publish
I'm not sure about bug reports, but wiki you definitely can host as files (or within the database - both options are available) - they call it embedded documentation. This is exactly what I was thinking to use instead of a dedicated CMS. In ikiwiki you have to have 2 packages - ikiwiki and git, here only fossil... ST _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list Freedombox-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss