The biggest problem with the GitHub system is that everything has to wait for approval. And sometimes those things appear to be forgotten. This dis-incentivizes the desire to contribute. Even after contributing, one may have to wait months before it gets into the main TiddlyWiki.com site.
Of course, it doesn't help that the GH approach is endlessly draconian, but people might be more excited to thread the needle if results were more immediate. We were told back in February that there was a new system coming that would make contributions easier, possibly within a multi-user TW-like environment leveraging AWS* . I wonder if that is still in the pipe-line? The problem with Toolmap is that it is (1) Proprietary and (2) Maintained by a single person. You either understand the concerns of proprietary software or you don't. If you've ever had a proprietary solution whisked away from under you, then you do. But this line from the TOS is concerning: "Your stuff may be transferred as assets of Dynalist if we're bought by another company." Problem (2) is the same as with the current GitHub solution. It's also unclear what I should be submitting. If I make a small macro or filter to help someone out, should I be bothering David about it? I think the best ultimate solution would be a MediaWiki type wiki environment where multiple individuals can contribute. -- Mark *I'm relying on my memory here, so apologies if I have the details wrong. On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 3:59:09 AM UTC-7, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: > > TWiRB = TiddlyWiki internet Resource Base. (The IMDb for TW.) > > *I have been very struck by David Gifford's list of resources at > TiddlyToolmap <https://dynalist.io/d/zUP-nIWu2FFoXH-oM7L7d9DM>*. Its > increasingly used and welcomed. > > It is having good "synergistic effects" in that a user wanting to look at > past solutions can find them MUCH more easily. > > This seriously leverages innovation. > > It is quite obvious its having tangible positive effects. > > Let this be not just David's work for us. But, rather a pledge to help him > solve the "info fragmentation" problem TW has permanently, by being > inspired by his work and building off it. > > --- > > David's list is not itself a TiddlyWiki. I don't see the problem. Yes, it > would be optimally best if it were a TW, since that is the general fetish. > BUT, I am more interested in what happens than any theory about what > "should" have happened that didn't. > > It works. > > --- > > Over on GitHub there is serious work of another kind going on, from a > different perspective, that leads off in other directions. Good ones to do > with ideas of automated data harvesting & inter-working. > > But the better elegance of GitHub I do NOT think has in anyway yet grasped > the nettle of "resources-in-the-wild". Why should it? > > BUT IF the idea is that a good resource list can ONLY come though some > GitHub mediated system you need to belong to in some way. Well, forget it. > That is wrong and actually fogs the waters. > > --- > > My point remains, outside GitHub, it is not the driving force in logging > resources. Why? Because most TW users don't use it. In other words, its not > a definer. > > The easiest I can say it is: *Rather than WE adapt to GitHub, GitHub > adapt to US*. > > --- > > This is why I suggested that a good interim step is to help focus less on > the "method" of communicating Important Resources and more on a basic "*data > structure for a resource*". By concentrating on getting the "CHUNKS" of > info correct enough they can be imported into anything. Combined. Re-done. > In a manageable way. That seems best for longevity. > > I wrote a post about it to Dev group here: > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tiddlywikidev/kz_EvphpMzY > > It is maybe not understood? > > I think it is important. David's pragmatism has, basically, given the > BASIS for a solution to a long-term problem. > > I would like we find some kind of scope of how to organise such info to > move on. A data structure seems easiest. > > David's list is approaching 600. If it gets much longer it will become > unwieldy to develop from. > > --- > > Allora. > > I said most of what I wanted to say & not too badly. > > Josiah > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/0f469ecf-1a1e-488b-ab5c-f88fa5fee09e%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
