On 4 фев, 13:14, Jeremy Ruston <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Yakov > > > resently I understood that some of my TiddlyWikis should be updated to > > the current version (2.6.5), but I want to review all the "functional" > > changes ("changes for users", not necessarily those ones important for > > developers). I tried to find the changelogs and found only the > > changelog at [1] which stops at v2.6.2 and the fact that v2.6.3 > > "doesn't bring changes for users" (ok, let's not pick on words, no > > offence meant) [2]. > > OK this is a mistake, the intention is to publish a human readable > changelog with each release. Obviously the commit log in Github gives > you a blow-by-blow account of what's changed, but it's often hard to > interpret. > > We'll try to sort this out for the next release; we need a checklist. > > > I have many TWs and updating them all can be a long story, especially > > regarding the problems of updating reported during some time > > (although, almost all of my TWs are 2.6.0 so perhaps this wouldn't be > > an issue). So as for now I think that updating is rather "on demand" > > thing rather than "regular to do" one. > > I think that that is a reasonable approach. > > Best wishes > > Jeremy > > > > > > > > > (further offtopic thoughts) > > Moreover, this one more detail of the issue that rises again and > > again: sharing between TWs -- of content, of settings, of plugins and > > other extensions. While I expect that futher development of > > IncludePlugin should solve most of these problems, I can't see such > > perspective for core upgrade (probably because I'm not that familiar > > with the update engine which can be also somehow tweaked with). > > > But afterall the following question arises: how much this "single html > > file" concept is more important than "interTW interaction and > > sharing"? Perhaps it's worth making core more like an editor for > > files? I'm absolutely for this (also because different "editors" are > > usefull for different types of devices) but here I have one big issue: > > can such approach be made without making loading TW over http even > > slower? > > > *** > > > I'd like to mention that "big tiddlers in Opera" bug [4] seems to be > > gone in TiddlyWiki v2.6.5. On the other hand, import doesn't work at > > all (in Opera 11.61; error message: "Error retrieving tiddlers from > > url, please ensure this url exists and is CORS enabled"); the "CORS" > > is a link to [5], but it's not as helpful, I'd expect (in fact, I > > don't understand anything there, but suspect that this is about > > importing over http while I've tried to import from a local TW). The > > same thing with FireFox 9.0.1. > > > I tried to update one document (v2.6.0) in Opera, and got "Error with > > the new core code", the same in FireFox. > > > Hmm.. so now the only way to update is to use Jon's TiddlyFileImportr > > [6] which worked fine for me. > > > [1]http://trac.tiddlywiki.org/wiki/History > > [2]http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki/browse_thread/thread/22e0f1... > > [3]http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki/browse_thread/thread/90d884... > > [4]https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki/browse_thread/thread/628ae... > > , ticket (probably to be closed) athttp://trac.tiddlywiki.org/ticket/1276 > > [5]http://enable-cors.org/ > > [6]http://repository.tiddlyspace.com/#TiddlyFileImportr
I see, looking forward. Don't forget the ticket, though: since it's desirable to migrate all the stuff to GitHub, no need to keep the ticket that regards an old version of Opera. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev?hl=en.
