On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> Yes, that’s a good proposal. Then all available Unix tools can be used
> to sort, find duplicates and make some order. Maybe it could be a dif‐
> ferent git repository to avoid overlapping merges. There could be still
>
Greetings.
On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 16:00:01 +0100 Martti Kühne wrote:
> Reading what hiro had to say about the topic makes it sound as if we
> just needed a wiki "pastebin" section that has built-in "archiving"
> (git rm) feature that builds on git's built-in feature of preserving
> history.
> Maybe
Martti: i tend to agree, but i wonder if that's not already how the
dwm wiki is being used at this moment. perhaps i don't get the
difference, or the addition you're proposing.
On 11/6/15, Martti Kühne wrote:
> Reading what hiro had to say about the topic makes it sound as if we
> just needed a w
Reading what hiro had to say about the topic makes it sound as if we
just needed a wiki "pastebin" section that has built-in "archiving"
(git rm) feature that builds on git's built-in feature of preserving
history.
Maybe we could write clients that don't give a shit whether such an
entry was archiv
> The idea of wanting a connection to a central database is what makes
> surveillance effective and in the end will reduce your freedom to noth‐
> ing. So keeping to a more »data packet« approach of spreading informa‐
> tion is something I see as the suckless way of distributing data.
Centr
