On Mar 19, 2:24 pm, vlak <vlakb...@gmail.com> wrote: > thanks for the links with information. I thought that, since tiddlyweb > is a reference implementation, that it was the intention to > have a lot of different backends. So its not againsttiddlyweb, its > for thetiddlywebspecification that I am interested in it. Different > server implemantations of the api may also help in testing it and > making better.
Yes, I totally agree, I didn't mean to sound overly negative or anything like that, I was just curious what it was about the existing stuff that wasn't a match. It sounds like your reasons are sound and I will be very excited to both help out and also to see the results. It is the intention for there to be lots of different backends, so very very cool. > On a user oriented perspectieve I aim for a simpler distribution of > the backend, i.e. single file (for desktop use included simple http > server, for server use as single cgi/scgi/fcgi). This is at least > possible with TCL starkits. Experimentally I did this with T'swiki, > an old server side for TW using TCL and SQLite. That should be possible and would be very useful. What you might like to do is join the tiddlyweb or tiddlywikidev google groups and discuss your plans there. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlyw...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
