Re: [fossil-users] Providing fossil as a vcs, wiki or blog for 'users'
On Nov 13, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Julian Fagir wrote: For people who dislike fossil as a wiki or vcs, there are still other solutions, but they're not automated, so that wouldn't stop me. So, my question: Do you think fossil is appropriate? As a vcs yes. The ticketing system needs some setup to fit my taste, but that's not hard. But, sadly, the wiki is way too simplistic to be practical. But this probably will be resolved one day. As I said, I'm relatively new to fossil, and may not have tried out all features. Would you have security concerns about that? Nope, Fossil is not dangerous to the machine it runs on. You can put it into chroot to feel extra safe in case of security breach. And do you have any suggestions what might help me with that? Are there standard settings you would suggest? Look into WAL mode for the database. Kind regards, Remigiusz Modrzejewski ___ 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] Providing fossil as a vcs, wiki or blog for 'users'
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski l...@maxnet.org.pl wrote: As a vcs yes. The ticketing system needs some setup to fit my taste, but that's not hard. But, sadly, the wiki is way too simplistic to be practical. But this probably will be resolved one day. Actually the JSON API is far enough along that a completely custom wiki could be based on it, using one's own custom wiki syntax, provided a client-side renderer is available for it. The user management and wiki APIs are feature-complete enough to support this, and implementing a proof-of-concept for this is on my (long) list of TODOs for the JSON API. The only (IMO) significantly missing feature in this area is the ability to get historical versions of the wiki pages - currently we only serve the latest version in the JSON API (fixing that is of course also on the TODO list). As I said, I'm relatively new to fossil, and may not have tried out all features. Would you have security concerns about that? Nope, Fossil is not dangerous to the machine it runs on. You can put it into chroot to feel extra safe in case of security breach. i'll second that heartily. Fossil requires no special privileges, and can run as an arbitrary unprivileged user provided that user has access to the repo file and the dir containing it. -- - 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] Providing fossil as a vcs, wiki or blog for 'users'
On Nov 16, 2011, at 4:11 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: As a vcs yes. The ticketing system needs some setup to fit my taste, but that's not hard. But, sadly, the wiki is way too simplistic to be practical. But this probably will be resolved one day. Actually the JSON API is far enough along that a completely custom wiki could be based on it, using one's own custom wiki syntax, provided a client-side renderer is available for it. The user management and wiki APIs are feature-complete enough to support this, and implementing a proof-of-concept for this is on my (long) list of TODOs for the JSON API. The only (IMO) significantly missing feature in this area is the ability to get historical versions of the wiki pages - currently we only serve the latest version in the JSON API (fixing that is of course also on the TODO list). Actually, I'm not sure if that's that good idea. This way you can bring client incompatibility, unless you mean writing in a better markup, but saving (and loading from) the plain Fossil thingy. It surely can be done, just is not as trivial as we'd like it to be. Kind regards, Remigiusz Modrzejewski ___ 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] Providing fossil as a vcs, wiki or blog for 'users'
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Julian Fagir listensamm...@komkon2.de wrote: So, my question: Do you think fossil is appropriate? It really depends on your and your customers' needs. It works well for decent number of projects. Certainly has has served the needs of the projects my coworkers and I work on. I was able to implement a few features we wanted through Fossil's built in scripting language. Really, only you can determine of it meets your needs. As you continue to explore its features, you should become obvious whether it will meet your needs. In some cases, you can find solutions (or partial solutions) either on this list, or in the Fossil cook book. Good Luck. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Providing fossil as a vcs, wiki or blog for 'users'
Hi, I'm somewhat new to fossil, but I'm absolutely astonished by the features it provides despite its simplicity. I'd like to provide fossil for our (ISPs) users because of its ease of automation: 1. fossil init 2. fossil user password 3. Generate DNS records, config and CGI for webserver Users would access the repository only via http or https, but they can also (though not automatically) get shell access. This way, we could simply provide an automated wiki and vcs creation. For people who dislike fossil as a wiki or vcs, there are still other solutions, but they're not automated, so that wouldn't stop me. So, my question: Do you think fossil is appropriate? As I said, I'm relatively new to fossil, and may not have tried out all features. Would you have security concerns about that? And do you have any suggestions what might help me with that? Are there standard settings you would suggest? Regards, Julian ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
