On 09/20/11 14:53, Eric wrote:
I agree entirely. I think Fossil is in danger of becoming some sort of Swiss Army Knife, rather than a finely honed specialised tool.
Actually fossil IS a swiss army knife. It combines a DVCS with tickets, wiki, http UI, user-mgmt & embedded doc. Its specialization is its swiss army knife function, while remaining self-sufficient.
> The only
suggestion for major change that I have seen lately that I approve of is to be able to build Fossil as a library.
If you have fossil as a library, having something to remote-control the fossil library is the next logical step. Of course if you're an IDE person, you'll appreciate easier integration with, say, the behemothian eclipse, the leviathan netbeans, the Zizian IDEA or the all-encompassing emacs. In case you aren't and want a finer grained control and scriptability than is doable right now with shell scripts and parsing the output of fossil, then I think you'll appreciate integration with a (script) language. One point of the whole integration is, as has been stated already, for it to be optional (not the fossil as library part, but the remote control part). No harm done for you if you don't want to use it; just as there's no harm done if you don't want to use the wiki, tickets, the user management, the web UI, i.e., fossil as a swiss army knife.
Regards, -Martin _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
