On Mon, 16 Sep 2013, Tobias Beer wrote:
First of all, I hope my somewhat challenging tone was ok...
Quite fine, welcomed in fact. Just understand that I and anyone else
will respond in kind and that at this stage in the development of the
project(s) and your level of engagement with the project(s) that what
matters most is not suggestions but implementations. Your efforts have
been great, so I'm not trying to suggest that nobody is noticing all
the great things you have done, but rather that it's a job that's
never done, for all of us.
The alternative is really straight forward. for me, the home tiddler of a
space is by default defined by the space, not by some shadow default that
is easily overwritten via inclusion.
Just made this:
https://github.com/TiddlySpace/tiddlyspace/issues/1101
Ergo, I think these two things would make sense ...
1) change the default recipe such that a public DefaultTiddlers tiddler is
created containing the TiddlyWiki default, yet not just as a shadow.
It's not a matter of changing the recipe (see the ticket).
2) PUT the same into all existing spaces that do not declare one and thus
are presumably quite agnostic about it or rather have the default, as I
don't know of any existing "apps" that define or depend on their own.
I'm not happy with backfilling tiddlers into existing spaces. There
are few enough active spaces that have some that are not in line with
the
Especialy since DefaultTiddlers is a TiddlyWiki requirement not a
TiddlySpace requirement: It would be hard to sure if a space was or
was not using TiddlyWiki.
For one, it speaks of some *ServerSettings *tiddler that neither seems to
exists, nor I ever heard of or were documented in a sensible way. That's
what I meant with "such contents should *never* be cemented in a space"
upon creation.
Right below where it mentions that tiddler it links to:
http://docs.tiddlyspace.com/ServerSettings%20shadow%20tiddler
Yes, that's somewhat new, so _older_ GettingStarted tiddlers don't
have it, supporting your case that the content should not be frozen.
What I think were a step in the right direction is a GettingStarted space
that thoughtfully guides new or existing users when trying to figure out
certain concerns, and which provides details on meeting certain ends,
overcoming known issues, topics like how to get / set up / work with
themes, localisations, plugins and what not ...starting by guiding
different personas to possibly different sets of Q&A based on: What is it
that the user want to achieve on TiddlySpace?
That's a fine idea.
If this is the case, that seems fine, but there's no point doing the
second point until that content exists.
That may be right. But perhaps there is no need to start with content that
is mountains more comprehensive (if not bloated) than what is in the
current GettingStarted tiddler... although chances are that it will be
naturally better structured (not linear) and evolve ...well, being a space
and all.
Yes, one would hope so, but efforts to engage the community in the
shared generation of documentation for any of tiddlyweb, tiddlyspace
or tiddlywiki have never quite flown as much as we would like. At the
moment the tidlywiki docs on tiddlyspace are only in any relatively
good state due in large part to your singular efforts.
It is true that at the moment TiddlySpace's interface is predisposed
to the members of a space. This was by design. The plan was to then
move on to the non-member experience but, well, everyone left.
;-)
I should probably not state it quite like that. People left because
they were not well supported and found better opportunities elsewhere.
They were then not replaced. This is somewhat in contract with my
situation.
I see. Would this be it...
https://github.com/TiddlySpace/tiddlyspace
That is where the code is developed, yes. Some of the TiddlyWiki side
content is pulled in from elsewhere.
I believe Mario was already poking in that direction. Perhaps it's time to
think less of just being a user and more in terms of developer / "source
(code)" contributor. We'll see how that works out. I understand that there
might soon'ish be a point when you can only afford reviewing proposed
commits to the codebase and then pushing them... rather than doing much
active development.
Yes, this is unfortunately true. I still don't know for certain how
things are going to turn out, but it is looking quite likely that my
involvement will be decreasing.
--
Chris Dent http://burningchrome.com/
[...]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
