On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 5:02 am "Gour" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Otherwise, lack of standard wiki I continue to be amazed by all this nonsense about the wiki. * There is _no_ standard wiki. The small number of formats I can write fluently is not the same an the small number of formats you can write fluently. All you can ever achieve is to change the probability that someone will have to learn a new format. I do not think the gain (for an unknown number of unknown people) is worth the effort. * The issue is further clouded by the assumption that the wiki is about project documentation. I think it is about quick notes, discussions, and, at most, snippets of draft documentation. I want my project documentation (user guides, developer guides, whatever else, and especially specifications) to be proper files in the repository, just like the source code. A project can choose to use wiki format for this (as has happened with the fossil project), but I don't want my SCM tool to dictate my documentation format, even though I may then need to find or create a web-delivery method for my chosen format. > & email interface for the tracker I don't know if it has a name but there seems to be a law that once a software product is sufficiently popular people want it to do everything, i.e. they want it to be a platform. Fossil sending email - probably OK. Fossil handling incoming mail - far too complicated and too far away from Fossil's core purpose, in my opinion. Eric _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
