On Wed, 5 May 2010 14:48:33 +0200, Gour g...@gour-nitai.com wrote:
On Wed, 05 May 2010 13:09:34 +0200
renework == renew...@xs4all.nl wrote:
renework I'm not clear for what you are going to use this for.
I'll try to explain...
renework If for writing documentation, say a user manual.
On 05/05/2010 10:53 AM, Twylite wrote:
That said, if you really want Markdown, why don't you use something like
Attacklab's Showdown (http://attacklab.net/showdown/), which is a
Markdown implementation in JavaScript. Write your Wiki pages in plain
text, include Showdown in the site header,
On Wed, 05 May 2010 16:53:27 +0200
Twylite == Twylite wrote:
Twylite Plugins are of limited value. The repository becomes
Twylite non-portable except to other Fossil installations with the
Twylite same plugins. The end of that road is that everyone has to
Twylite have all the markup plugins,
On Wed, 05 May 2010 16:32:29 +0200
renework == renework wrote:
renework You get into trouble if it is contained in two wiki pages.
renework Basically your are better of to write two markdown files and
renework a Makefile. Which you can do in Darcs anyway.
Well, the more I think about it, it
On Tue, 04 May 2010 10:39:22 -0400
Joshua == Joshua Painewrote:
Joshua If it's safe for your use case to turn on 'allow all html
Joshua tags' (it's not safe if you let the general public create or
Joshua edit tickets or wiki pages), then it's possible to implement
Joshua Markdown for fossil wiki
There is exists no wiki markup that will make everybody happy. Any choice
of wiki markup will leave some users grumbling that a different choice
should have been made.
I am personally very happy with the current wiki markup in Fossil. It meets
my needs very well. And even if someone where able
On Tue, 4 May 2010 11:28:03 -0400
Richard == Richard Hipp wrote:
Richard There is exists no wiki markup that will make everybody
Richard happy. Any choice of wiki markup will leave some users
Richard grumbling that a different choice should have been made.
I'm very well aware of it...and not
This is kind of funny. We have been debating this and the end result was
something to the effect of:
Yeah, it may be good, but who will program it?
It's already done and has been by Robert...
http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/timeline?t=creole
So, no dependencies, the code is written and
Try closer to 40. It may be a small number compared to the amount of people
who download Fossil but I believe it to be a representative number.
So yes, I'm calling this an overwhelming majority. You can stick your head
in the sand if you want but this is a pretty clear cut case of: Software is
On Sun, December 6, 2009 at 9:57 am, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene
thinkwritem...@gmail.com wrote:
Try closer to 40. It may be a small number compared to the amount of people
who download Fossil but I believe it to be a representative number.
So yes, I'm calling this an overwhelming majority. You
Will Duquette wrote:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 3:23 AM, Daniel Clark wrote:
Joshua Paine wrote:
On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 16:21 -0500, Daniel Clark wrote:
I'm missing why you wouldn't want to just implement this as code
(in C
or Javascript) that can translate from fossil wiki markup to
markdown
Hi,
Try closer to 40. It may be a small number compared to the amount of
people who download Fossil but I believe it to be a representative number.
Your lack of understanding of negative response bias doesn't make it go
away. The majority have been silent on this issue, which doesn't tell
us
Joshua Paine wrote:
On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 16:21 -0500, Daniel Clark wrote:
I'm missing why you wouldn't want to just implement this as code (in C
or Javascript) that can translate from fossil wiki markup to markdown
markup (or whatever) and back.
Doing it in C, if it's not integrated into
I'm not sure I get why there's talk of custom fossil. This is a feature
that a overwhelming majority want. If the feature were put in wouldn't it
just be people with old fossil needing to update?
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com wrote:
On Dec 5, 2009, at 3:23
On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 11:46 -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote:
If the feature were put in wouldn't it just be people with old fossil
needing to update?
Yes, but...
I'm not sure I get why there's talk of custom fossil. This is a
feature that a overwhelming majority want.
But it's a feature
On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:26:20PM -0500, Joshua Paine wrote:
On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 11:46 -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote:
If the feature were put in wouldn't it just be people with old fossil
needing to update?
Yes, but...
I'm not sure I get why there's talk of custom fossil. This
Hello Daniel,
I'm missing why you wouldn't want to just implement this as code (in C
or Javascript) that can translate from fossil wiki markup to markdown
markup (or whatever) and back.
I think everyone here is interested in any markup implementation.
However, there's only one implementation
On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 16:21 -0500, Daniel Clark wrote:
I'm missing why you wouldn't want to just implement this as code (in C
or Javascript) that can translate from fossil wiki markup to markdown
markup (or whatever) and back.
Doing it in C, if it's not integrated into fossil core, means to
I'm not going to bother stopping it, nor did I plan to. I was only
showing
you what the first 10m showed. Now?
YES: 13
NO: 3
Any: 13
Markdown: 3
Creole: 1
Don't forget to add in the Apathetic or Not sures. I'm so unsure
and apathetic, I don't remember which one I picked.
I do know
What about just having a few small plugins based on the markdown you want?
Separate from the source, not required, 1 plugin per formatting.
I don't care what's used, as long as it's not plain HTML. HTML is
mental-process retardant.
___
fossil-users
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.comwrote:
There are only a small handful of popular wiki languages. Some
implementations may have more or less features
+1 for google code wiki. :)
Fossil itself is an example of looking at an already-crowded field and
The number of mails about this just proves that there is no right choice
for a new wiki markup. There are plenty of lightweight markup formats out
there (with their own enthusiastic followers) that haven't even been
mentioned here yet. If you want to do your project documentation a
particular way,
: Michael Richter
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 12:53 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
Now to refute this. Keep in mind that if I had my 'druthers I'd have Markdown
as well while you read this.
Markdown is a non-trivial
fossil.c -o fossil
Pretty easy, eh? Now, that's an over simplification but not by much.
Jeremy
--
From: Eric e...@deptj.eu
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 6:44 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown
...@deptj.eu
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 6:44 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
The number of mails about this just proves that there is no right choice
for a new wiki markup. There are plenty of lightweight markup formats
I'm new to fossil, but if you need a different markup notation you can
check it in, along with the tool you need to process it.
Stephen
On Sunday, November 29, 2009, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene
thinkwritem...@gmail.com wrote:
What about just having a few small plugins based on the markdown you want?
2009/11/29 Jeremy Cowgar jer...@cowgar.com
It has been mentioned that there will be complaining and arguing to what
format to choose and yet there has been none, only those who dislike a
format *making assumptions* as to what will happen.
In other news, irony is my very favourite thing in
.
Jeremy
--
From: Zed A. Shaw zeds...@zedshaw.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 3:18 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 11:34:09PM -0500, Joshua Paine wrote
been none, only those who
dislike a format making assumptions as to what will happen.
Jeremy
From: Michael Richter
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 9:36 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
And with this you lose
...@wjduquette.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 10:36 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
My two cents on all of this: regardless of what wiki syntax is used,
the Fossil Wiki is a lousy way to do your software documentation. You
From: Jeremy Cowgar jer...@cowgar.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:01 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
I think you are misunderstanding what one should document in the fossil
wiki.
I should have said what I put
for.
Jeremy
--
From: Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 10:36 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
My two cents on all of this: regardless of what
The current way to format text blows.
There is a divide on which markdown to use.
Formatting makes reading text much much better.
Solution: Put the top three markdowns in a list. Use a random number
generator to pick the markdown language.
These large email conversations about markdown* are
One thought that I had was to enable feeding wiki pages through a TCP
pipe so that they could be post-processed. That would enable storing
the pages in the wiki and rendering the wiki pages completely could be
done on any platform that supports a web server. Any wiki markup can be
supported
On Sun, 2009-11-29 at 08:51 -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote:
There is a divide on which markdown to use.
That's just it: there isn't! There are people who say we don't need a
markdown-esque formatting (or the minimal one already in fossil is
enough), and there are people who want a more
From: Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com
Date: Sun, November 29, 2009 3:36 pm
My two cents on all of this: regardless of what wiki syntax is used,
the Fossil Wiki is a lousy way to do your software documentation. You
write your software. Ultimately, you deliver your
Q1: 4 YES | 1 APATHETIC | 2 NO
Q2: 4 WHATEVER WORKS | 2 HTML | 1 MARKDOWN
PS I said this was specifically for my own curiosity, nothing more. Nice
try, Zed.
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Zed A. Shaw zeds...@zedshaw.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 05:05:52PM -0600, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene
Purely out of curiousity, I've glanced at Markdown and Creole, neither
of which I've used.
The problem with Markdown is that the format as defined simply isn't a
Wiki format. It's Wiki-like, but doesn't include the markup for links
to wiki pages. (There's some kind of linking, but it
that does the
formatting and can be added too slowly, etc...
Jeremy
--
From: Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 9:15 PM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I
and can be added too slowly, etc...
Jeremy
--
From: Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 9:15 PM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
Purely out
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 04:19:02PM -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote:
Q1: 4 YES | 1 APATHETIC | 2 NO
Q2: 4 WHATEVER WORKS | 2 HTML | 1 MARKDOWN
PS I said this was specifically for my own curiosity, nothing more. Nice
try, Zed.
Now now, you can't stop it when you want. To keep you honest
I'm not going to bother stopping it, nor did I plan to. I was only showing
you what the first 10m showed. Now?
YES: 13
NO: 3
Any: 13
Markdown: 3
Creole: 1
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Zed A. Shaw zeds...@zedshaw.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 04:19:02PM -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene
42 matches
Mail list logo
