On 7 August 2012 20:10, Miles Fidelman <[email protected]> wrote: > Michal Suchanek wrote: >> >> On 6 August 2012 19:21, Miles Fidelman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> >>> My personal observation has been that even with a tiny group, an email >>> containing a list of action items very quickly yields a thread of dozens, >>> or >>> hundreds of follow-ups - requests for details, Q&A, status updates, >>> nagging, >>> ..... - and sorting through all that info is a real pain and time sink, >>> not >>> to mention confusing. >> >> Yes, that's what IRC is good for. You get much of the details, Q&A, >> and whatnot sorted out in real time before you start writing a >> document, and only few revisions are needed to finish then. Also for >> status updates that are not obvious as bugs closed or patches pushed. >> >> And if you meant that email is bad for TODO list it definitely is. >> Sane people use a text file tracked in vcs with project code or a wiki >> page or an issue tracker. Unlike email all these media tend to persist >> in the same place and are not pushed away by more recent messages. >> >>> Now if that first message was "smarter" - so that responding updated the >>> original (like editing a wiki page by email) - a lot of the pain and >>> confusion would go away. >> >> I think google tried something like that with Wave ;-) > > > Well, yes and no. What was really disappointing about Wave was that it was > closed. It didn't even send email notifications of an update to a Wave. > > >>>> Note that most wikis are versioned, and some can use a vcs as backend >>>> directly. So more permanent stuff not part of documentation that is >>>> not to be fished in irc logs and mail archives typically ends up on a >>>> wiki or a developer blog. >>> >>> >>> That nicely captures what I'm trying to accomplish. In a sense, >>> TiddlyWiki >>> meets Fossil-SCM built on HTML5 and a P2P protocol is kind of what I'm >>> trying to achieve. >> >> Fossil is almost but not quite such a wiki. It has built in wiki that >> is not versioned, and versioned documents that are not editable >> through the fossil web UI. If you modified fossil to make the >> versioned documents editable you can use the clone and autosync >> features to propagate changes. > > > That's close to what I have in mind. I'm hoping to push the code into the > documents themselves, and store things either in browser storage or local > file systems - making it all a lot more accessible for folks who don't want > to install code. > > For a software development team, it makes lots of sense for everyone to > install a copy of Fossil (or whatever). But for an action item list, it's
You don't need to install a copy of fossil to edit the wiki. It's accessible through the browser, after all. But you can install fossil and make a clone of the wiki, and the autosync ensures that it is updated continuously. > really a lot easier if everything happens through email and browser (compose And with a wiki it does happen through browser. I don't see how email fits in here since you yourself claim how horrible it is. > an email, recipient clicks, opens in browser, icon appears on desktop for > future access). Now the part about icon appearing on desktop is really scary. I am sure that on my system it will not appear ;-) Cheers Michal _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
