Re: [fossil-users] new fossil docs: is the wiki or embedded docs preferred?
On Sep 16, 2011, at 9:39 PM, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > Hmmm… > > If Fossil was created today, with the knowledge of today, would it still have > wiki pages? Would it make Fossil a simpler, but equally powerful tool if it > just had (web editable) embedded documentation? Embedded documentation is versioned along with files, so no, I don't think it would be better. I, for one, wouldn't want to frequently merge my working copy with changes to embedded docs made from web interface. Plus, this would create unwanted forks. Also, having a separate wiki allows for more granular access control. -- Dmitry Chestnykh ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] new fossil docs: is the wiki or embedded docs preferred?
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > Hmmm… > > If Fossil was created today, with the knowledge of today, would it still > have wiki pages? Would it make Fossil a simpler, but equally powerful tool > if it just had (web editable) embedded documentation? Good question. When is started using fossil, two features really impressed me: CGI and the wiki (because i document insane amounts). For me, at least, it was one of the things that got me hooked. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] new fossil docs: is the wiki or embedded docs preferred?
Hmmm… If Fossil was created today, with the knowledge of today, would it still have wiki pages? Would it make Fossil a simpler, but equally powerful tool if it just had (web editable) embedded documentation? Paul On 15 Sep 2011, at 14:10 , Matt Welland wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:50 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:11 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > Hi, all, > > When adding new docs (for the up-coming json bits), which is the currently > preferred approach: wiki or embedded docs ? > > I've grown to prefer embedded docs, since they are tied to specific versions > of the code, and hence you know exactly which version of the code the > documentation applies to. > > In my own projects I've found this to be true also but then we sorely miss > the ability to make quick edits which is one of the best things about the > Wiki. Is it technically feasible to implement editing and checking in of > controlled files from the web interface? It imagine it would require another > permissions flag and would be a lot of work but if some enterprising fossil > hacker decided to implement it I for one would be thrilled :) > ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] new fossil docs: is the wiki or embedded docs preferred?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Matt Welland wrote: > >> ...checking in of controlled files from the web interface? It imagine it >> would require >> > > Just FYI: one of the goals of the JSON API is saving wiki pages (and > Sorry, hit send too soon... In theory we could also perform commits over the JSON interface, at least for text files (things which can be JSONified), but implementing that is way down the list of TODOs. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] new fossil docs: is the wiki or embedded docs preferred?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Matt Welland wrote: > In my own projects I've found this to be true also but then we sorely miss > the ability to make quick edits which is one of the best things about the > Wiki. Is it technically feasible to implement editing and checking in of > controlled files from the web interface? It imagine it would require > Just FYI: one of the goals of the JSON API is saving wiki pages (and that's one of my own personal favourite use cases for the JSON bits, so it'll eventually get done). We wouldn't need special permissions for that implementation, as we would simply use fossil's existing perms. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] new fossil docs: is the wiki or embedded docs preferred?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:50 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:11 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > >> Hi, all, >> >> When adding new docs (for the up-coming json bits), which is the currently >> preferred approach: wiki or embedded docs ? >> > > I've grown to prefer embedded docs, since they are tied to specific > versions of the code, and hence you know exactly which version of the code > the documentation applies to. > In my own projects I've found this to be true also but then we sorely miss the ability to make quick edits which is one of the best things about the Wiki. Is it technically feasible to implement editing and checking in of controlled files from the web interface? It imagine it would require another permissions flag and would be a lot of work but if some enterprising fossil hacker decided to implement it I for one would be thrilled :) > > >> http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ >> -- >> - stephan beal >> >> ___ >> fossil-users mailing list >> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org >> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users >> >> > > > -- > D. Richard Hipp > d...@sqlite.org > > ___ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > > ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] new fossil docs: is the wiki or embedded docs preferred?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:11 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > Hi, all, > > When adding new docs (for the up-coming json bits), which is the currently > preferred approach: wiki or embedded docs ? > I've grown to prefer embedded docs, since they are tied to specific versions of the code, and hence you know exactly which version of the code the documentation applies to. > > -- > - stephan beal > http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ > > ___ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > > -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
