On 09/20/11 12:49, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
Well, my question was actually a veiled uneasy feeling about possible code bloat and feature creep.
If you look at the top feature request for fossil I wouldn't say that's bloat or feature creep. It's a necessity for fossil to be considered in some settings.
While I *am* a Tcl aficionado, for me, one of the Fossil's selling points is its self-containment and a minimal set of dependencies.
As I've written in another email, the single-file blessing of fossil needs to be contained. Anything not fulfilling that is a failure even before its conception. Static linking of the respective language library is a must, as is self-containment of its (standard) library. Users may choose to use the system installations for both, naturally, as is possible already right now for using the system sqlite. But I do not want, at all, to touch the single file blessing of fossil.
Regards, -Martin _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
