On 10/08/2010, b...@methodlogic.net wrote:
> The wiki/bugtracker integration is key to it's design principles. The
> repository is a complete collection of source files, documentation (wiki)
> and tickets (bugtracker). This means that as repositories are cloned,
> the new repository has a very com
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 03:49:16PM +0200, pancake wrote:
> I have found that scm to be quite interesting (www.fossil-scm.org).
>
> What do you think about it? I have not started to use it, because I have
> all my code in mercurial,
> but I would be happy to move to fossil if results to be a de
Hey,
On 10 August 2010 16:24, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> web based project documentation solutions can
> be improved but it's not such a big deal
> (wiki, man2html, ..)
I think suckless.org's solution to this (hg & werc) is perfect. Though
I would consider keeping the documentation for a project in
* pancake [2010-08-10 15:49:16 +0200]:
> I have found that scm to be quite interesting (www.fossil-scm.org).
there is still no good issue tracking system!
web based project documentation solutions can
be improved but it's not such a big deal
(wiki, man2html, ..)
integrating these into the vcs
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:49:16 +0200, pancake wrote:
> I think fossil is far more smart than mercurial (no python), and can be
> a good alternative. It
> is not suckless, but gets closer to it :)
I have tried it because it is what Zed Shaw uses for Mongrel2. Apparently
its creator is that of SQLi
I have found that scm to be quite interesting (www.fossil-scm.org).
What do you think about it? I have not started to use it, because I have
all my code in mercurial,
but I would be happy to move to fossil if results to be a decent
alternative.
The goods I found on it:
*) written in C
*) ze
