What about just having a few small plugins based on the markdown you want?
Separate from the source, not required, 1 plugin per formatting.
I don't care what's used, as long as it's not plain HTML. HTML is
mental-process retardant.
___
fossil-users
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.comwrote:
There are only a small handful of popular wiki languages. Some
implementations may have more or less features
+1 for google code wiki. :)
Fossil itself is an example of looking at an already-crowded field and
Hi, all!
A long, long time ago someone (DRH?) posted a way to allow us to view
locally-modified wiki pages before they are committed by using the local
webserver. i seem to remember the keyword tip being somewhere in the URL.
Does one of you happen to remember it? i've been unable to find it.
You can view not-yet-commited embedded documentation by replacing tip in the
URL with ckout.
More here: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/tip/www/embeddeddoc.wiki
--
Dmitry Chestnykh
Coding Robots
http://www.codingrobots.com
dmi...@codingrobots.com
On 29.11.2009, at 13:24, Stephan
The number of mails about this just proves that there is no right choice
for a new wiki markup. There are plenty of lightweight markup formats out
there (with their own enthusiastic followers) that haven't even been
mentioned here yet. If you want to do your project documentation a
particular way,
There is nothing stopping you checking in your tool of choice for the
project you are working on.
S.
On Saturday, November 28, 2009, Jeremy Cowgar jer...@cowgar.com wrote:
Is Fossil going to have Wiki formatting? It's a real drag to
use all the standard HTML when there are formats that
Others... I've mentioned other standards, yes. However, I would accept *any*
complete format. Creole is NOT better than Markdown and Markdown is NOT better
than Textitle and Textile is NOT better than Creole... They all do the same
thing. They are all complete. What I am suggesting for the wiki
For those that would like a real human formatting language it would be worth
a dependency. For those that prefer to use HTML can simply not link in the
library.
#ifdef MARKDOWN
#include markdown.h
#endif
...
#ifdef MARKDOWN
output = ConvertMarkdown(rawText);
#endif
...
$ gcc -DMARKDOWN
And with this you lose the interoperability of Fossil repositories.
Go team.
2009/11/29 Jeremy Cowgar jer...@cowgar.com
For those that would like a real human formatting language it would be
worth
a dependency. For those that prefer to use HTML can simply not link in the
library.
#ifdef
I'm new to fossil, but if you need a different markup notation you can
check it in, along with the tool you need to process it.
Stephen
On Sunday, November 29, 2009, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene
thinkwritem...@gmail.com wrote:
What about just having a few small plugins based on the markdown you want?
If you look into a lot of the wiki's, they see the problem as well and many
devs have went together to start standardizing on a format, Creole being one
of them. Every wiki has their own special format but the formats that I have
mentioned are formats that are creating a standard, cross-wiki,
2009/11/29 Jeremy Cowgar jer...@cowgar.com
It has been mentioned that there will be complaining and arguing to what
format to choose and yet there has been none, only those who dislike a
format *making assumptions* as to what will happen.
In other news, irony is my very favourite thing in
Zed,
To some people the documentation of their project is of vital importance and
the ability to do that self contained in Fossil is not a minor or marginal
issue. Fossil works fantastic for me, the only problem I see right now is
the lack of ability to easy document my project. Fossil see's
My two cents on all of this: regardless of what wiki syntax is used,
the Fossil Wiki is a lousy way to do your software documentation. You
write your software. Ultimately, you deliver your software. Then you
want to deliver your documentation *with* your software...and it's in
a wiki
I think you are misunderstanding what one should document in the fossil
wiki. Not at all end user documentation. The documentation I put there is
design documentation, application goals/requirements, etc... End user
documentation is something totally different that is not at all contained in
From: Jeremy Cowgar jer...@cowgar.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:01 AM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The case for Markdown (yes, I rtfm)
I think you are misunderstanding what one should document in the fossil
wiki.
I should have said what I put in
Fair enough.
On Nov 29, 2009, at 8:01 AM, Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
I think you are misunderstanding what one should document in the
fossil
wiki. Not at all end user documentation. The documentation I put
there is
design documentation, application goals/requirements, etc... End user
The current way to format text blows.
There is a divide on which markdown to use.
Formatting makes reading text much much better.
Solution: Put the top three markdowns in a list. Use a random number
generator to pick the markdown language.
These large email conversations about markdown* are
One thought that I had was to enable feeding wiki pages through a TCP
pipe so that they could be post-processed. That would enable storing
the pages in the wiki and rendering the wiki pages completely could be
done on any platform that supports a web server. Any wiki markup can be
supported
On Sun, 2009-11-29 at 08:51 -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote:
There is a divide on which markdown to use.
That's just it: there isn't! There are people who say we don't need a
markdown-esque formatting (or the minimal one already in fossil is
enough), and there are people who want a more
From: Will Duquette w...@wjduquette.com
Date: Sun, November 29, 2009 3:36 pm
My two cents on all of this: regardless of what wiki syntax is used,
the Fossil Wiki is a lousy way to do your software documentation. You
write your software. Ultimately, you deliver your
Q1: 4 YES | 1 APATHETIC | 2 NO
Q2: 4 WHATEVER WORKS | 2 HTML | 1 MARKDOWN
PS I said this was specifically for my own curiosity, nothing more. Nice
try, Zed.
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Zed A. Shaw zeds...@zedshaw.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 05:05:52PM -0600, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene
Anonymous can clone it, according to the Users page. I've not tried
that myself.
Will
On Nov 29, 2009, at 5:04 PM, chi wrote:
Will Duquette wrote:
Chi,
Hello Will,
Thanks for the word about the bug fix. I'll see about updating to
the
latest Fossil binary; I'd been putting it
Purely out of curiousity, I've glanced at Markdown and Creole, neither
of which I've used.
The problem with Markdown is that the format as defined simply isn't a
Wiki format. It's Wiki-like, but doesn't include the markup for links
to wiki pages. (There's some kind of linking, but it
I have not done extensive research either, however, I would say solve the
first problem first.
1. Can we extend the wiki to allow better text formatting?
2. If so, what format would we want to implement?
3. Who will do the implementation?
4. --- Now we can look at libraries ---
4a. Is there a
Will Duquette wrote:
Anonymous can clone it, according to the Users page. I've not tried
that myself.
Hmmm ... if I try, fossil means, that anonymous have no rights to clone
the repository. If you look onto the User page, what password user
anonymous posses? Perhaps it is some hex
Some of the e-mails in this thread today made it sound like it would
be an easy thing to just drop one of these formats in; or, at least,
so I interpreted them. As someone noted, a little data is a useful
thing, so I went and found some.
Understand, I'm not advocating for any result in
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 04:19:02PM -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene wrote:
Q1: 4 YES | 1 APATHETIC | 2 NO
Q2: 4 WHATEVER WORKS | 2 HTML | 1 MARKDOWN
PS I said this was specifically for my own curiosity, nothing more. Nice
try, Zed.
Now now, you can't stop it when you want. To keep you honest
I'm not going to bother stopping it, nor did I plan to. I was only showing
you what the first 10m showed. Now?
YES: 13
NO: 3
Any: 13
Markdown: 3
Creole: 1
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Zed A. Shaw zeds...@zedshaw.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 04:19:02PM -0800, Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene
Will Duquette wrote:
I thought that might be the case, but I wasn't sure. I've set
it up so that nobody can clone. Alternatively, you can log in
as anonymous and use the Zip Archive link on the Leaf page.
Or you can download glue.kit.
Thank you, now cloning worked out :-)
Thank you,
30 matches
Mail list logo
