I agree with this too. Probably a zip file, but anyway, something very standard. The thing to work out would be what should be in the package.
On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 11:09:53 AM UTC-4 [email protected] wrote: > I don't consider myself as a leo specialist, but I firmly believe that you > should support Edward and Offray positions. If you would _Ever_ neet to > embed .leo and external files together in something more powerful than a > zip file, go for the SQLite app format, and don't DON'T reinvent a new > incompatible one. > > On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 11:48:06 PM UTC+1 [email protected] wrote: > >> It's been a long time since I tried it, and my current install of Hg >> doesn't seem to be having any trouble with a .leo file. That's good! >> >> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 6:31:24 PM UTC-4 [email protected] wrote: >> >>> I have used Mercurial on my computer for some time. But it just grew >>> and I now have a lot of Leo projects scattered all over. Some of them have >>> absolute @paths, and some of those aren't valid anymore because they came >>> from a different computer with a somewhat different organization (obviously >>> these may have been inactive for some time!). Reading @Offray's post has >>> gotten me thinking about this subject. For the time being, I don't see a >>> reason to prefer Fossil over Mercurial (for my purposes), and I'm more >>> familiar with Mercurial. >>> >>> One thing I'm not so clear about: Fossil is said to have just a >>> "single" file. Of course, there will be a working directory involved, >>> too. So far as I can can tell, the Hg record of changes is in a single .hg >>> directory, but the working directory is needed to actually have the files. >>> So collecting the whole works in a single file would basically mean zipping >>> up the working directory with its .hg repo. >>> >>> I don't know about Fossil, but Hg treats XML files as binary files and >>> doesn't to text diffs on them. I'm not sure if that can be changed or not. >>> >>> I will be thinking for some time about organization and workflow, before >>> I decide how to proceed. >>> >>> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 8:58:38 AM UTC-4 [email protected] >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I usually keep my Leo files and its imported/exported files in Fossil >>>> repository[1] (kind of a GitHub in a box, with less impedance), all with >>>> relative links to the repository root where project files are located. >>>> Fossil's author propose SQLite as a file format [2][2a] and I think that >>>> single, self contained files with a powerful, light and portable SQLite >>>> database behind Fossil repositories are the best incarnation so far of a >>>> project "format" I have been able to work with so far (despite most of the >>>> people knowing mostly/only Git). I have used Fossil extensively in my >>>> documentation projects since 2011, including Leo files talking with other >>>> files in the same repository. >>>> >>>> [1] https://fossil-scm.org/ >>>> [2] https://sqlite.org/appfileformat.html >>>> [2a] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y_ABXwYtuc >>>> >>>> So I second the idea of *not* needing a project format when Fossil is >>>> there, as it is one of the best ways to package project resources and >>>> their >>>> history in a single file, publishing such projects/resources and enabling >>>> collaboration. A recent example of such combination can be found at >>>> [3][3a][3b]. >>>> >>>> [3] >>>> https://mutabit.com/repos.fossil/malleable-systems/doc/trunk/wiki/en/malleable-systems-wiki--23fm1.md.html >>>> [3a] https://mutabit.com/repos.fossil/malleable-systems/timeline >>>> [3b] https://mutabit.com/repos.fossil/malleable-systems >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Offray >>>> On 16/03/22 6:47, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> I should perhaps written "additional" so as not to imply replacing the >>>> existing .leo files. >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 7:39:19 AM UTC-4 Edward K. Ream wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:35 PM [email protected] <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The short answer to the question is no :-) >>>>> >>>>> Imo, .leo files are better than typical project files: all data are in >>>>> one place (the .leo file), most data are visible, and all data, including >>>>> uA's, are accessible to scripts and plugins. >>>>> >>>>> The problems you mention are real, but the solution is not some new >>>>> file format. >>>>> >>>>> Edward >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "leo-editor" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/1e45209e-4617-4160-98b1-6cbc63923cf3n%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/1e45209e-4617-4160-98b1-6cbc63923cf3n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/0681766e-fa11-4527-b5d5-71938daf7d77n%40googlegroups.com.
