Hi Jeremy, > Just imagine that we did create an alternative core plugin that had less > in it. Then every change to TW, and every change by every plugin author, > would need to be verified in both environments. The workload is terrifying > for a project like this. > <javascript:> >
I totally agree, especially with "bare-bones" being rather losely defined. Any bare-bones-build would have to be... - constructed => here's probably where most feedback would be welcome - documented - maintained - tested - supported ...by whomever desires it. That sounds to me that the goal of the "bare bones" edition is to start > again with a simpler UI. Yes, the details being in all the degrees of "simple", all the way down to "render only". As I've said before, there's much easier ways to achieve that goal. > Details to that would be what anyone wishing to go down that route would best start with, e.g. stripping out code comments, minifying js, etc. ~ I totally agree, wishes to have anything like that be part of the core distro are, frankly, unreasonable... unless perhaps there was some major benefit to that to the core project, which has yet to show up. Questions as to "how far can I strip the core down", depend on what that "core" is that anyone wants left. Best wishes, — tb -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/21521bfc-36ab-4cd0-b51f-2cbb8efb0158%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
