Thus said Stephan Beal on Mon, 13 May 2013 11:04:23 +0200: > While i'm not at all against the idea of upgrading the wiki pages to > full-fledged content, i just want to point out that this feature > would affect more than the www GUI: the (fossil wiki commit) and > (/json/wiki/save) commands would also be affected by this, and would > need to be expanded to catch/reject/report merge conflicts.
I'm new to fossil so this approach may not work, but cannot these interfaces always just do a forced commit which may or may not cause a fork (perhaps reporting in some fashion for clients that might care)? Then couldn't the fossil command line tool be used to merge and resolve any conflicts? When I first learned about fossil and the integrated tickets/wiki, I assumed that both of these features were also version controlled just like any other might that might exist in the repository. Why should they not be? And why should they not be just as simply accessible (e.g. source controlled) as any other file that I might place in a repository? Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400000005190fbcc _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
