Hi Mat > > So, do I understand it right that "editions" will then be something* > formally official *and they are added individually by an administrator > (presumably you). >
Yes, that's right. The idea is that tiddlywiki.com would be a curated store of resources. One of the problems we're trying to solve here is the way that with TiddlyWiki Classic the resources were spread around the internet, which led to problems when people drifted away, or let domain names lapse. We can see the issue right now with Skeeve's plugins: some of them are out-of-date and unneeded, and yet they are still there, taking peoples attention. We've discussed all this many times in various hangouts, it would be useful if somebody could find the references. > > Is there no intention for tw.com to include some kind of more > unrestricted publishing, a bit like tiddlyspot, where it is more up to the > creator of the TW to classify it as an edition or something else? > Tiddlyspot is of course not sufficient in this regard because there is, > just to name two things, no central listing to show what is available and > no real way to distinguish if a spot is a real application or some testing > experiment. > I think that resources that haven't been adopted by the community should not be hosted on tiddlywiki.com (they can and should be linked of course). The idea is to make it clearer to users which resources are officially supported and which are community supported. > > introducing a new "wiki" folder in the repo. > > Great! > > Actually.. does anybody know if it would be possible to use github as a > backend for what I describe above? A TW, perhaps appearing a bit like Apple > store / Google store and possibly even itself hosted on github (like > tw.com is, yes?), that pulls/fetches meta-data from peoples own githosted > TW creations, so it can list those? > That would need some server side logic. But there's already a reasonably good process for that: anyone can send a pull request to add a resource link to tiddlywiki.com. The challenge is that it requires me to actually merge the change and push the changes to tiddlywiki.com. But there's no alternative to administrative involvement unless we're going to turn tiddlywiki.com into an unmoderated thing that anyone can edit. > > This would maybe allow this TW store to *visualize forks* of the > creations so that the visitor can fetch different variants of an > edition/application. I mean, automatically (I assume github has a mechanism > so you can see what forks have sprung from the current... right?) Maybe > even the user created TW's can have this mechanism to show a visitor the > existing variants.... > The problem here is that not everyone stores the source of their wikis on GitHub, nor do they necessarily fork from the original place. Thanks for you patient explanations on things. It is very valuable because > I'm convinced that contributing stuff is a lot easier for people when they > have the goal envisioned clearly. > No problem, I've been pretty busy recently and not able to contribute as much as I'd like to this discussion, Best wishes Jeremy. > > > <:-) > -- Jeremy Ruston mailto:[email protected] -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CAPKKYJbvVnbzNoF675fQhs6jC-JhDSp2B-ZnH6XUJ2GMnJz%2BVg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
