[pmwiki-users] Why all this zapping?

[The Editor]

On 4/30/07, marc <gmane at auxbuss.com> wrote:
> The Editor said...
> > On 4/30/07, Ben Wilson <dausha at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/30/07, The Editor <editor at fast.st> wrote:
> >
> > I just
> > kept coming up against obstacles and complexities in PmWiki in regards
> > to various cutting edge ZAP functionalities. ZAP works in PmWiki, and
> > PmWiki is a great tool--but both could be integrated in ways that
> > would make a lot of things cleaner and simpler.
>
> You need to cite, Dan. I've mentioned before that you can be light on
> facts, and things ain't improving. In any case, if you believe that
> PmWiki could do things "cleaner and simpler", then why not be a fine
> upstanding OSS citizen and post you patches, so that Pm (and others) can
> assess them? If you took that approach, then I doubt anyone would notice
> you calling yourself a1a1a1a1caveman.

Actually the changes I'm talking about are far deeper and more
systemic than can likely be fixed with a patch or recipe. And (IMO)
would require a major overhaul of how PmWiki works. I've discussed
this some time ago with Pm (who was very gracious in his response, as
always) and was encouraged to explore this path if I wanted, so I
decided to tinker with it a bit--now that ZAP is about finished.

I should also add from many posts on this list in the past that some
of the choices I've made for ZAPwiki will not be popular with
experienced PmWiki users--and probably with good reason. I believe
however, the strategy behind it may well produce some surprizing
results, and possibly stimulate development in PmWiki.

You can check out the specs if you are interested in the kinds of
changes I'm talking about at ZAPsite. Most of the differences either
Pm and others have argued against in the past, or are not currently
implementable in PmWiki. Some are somewhat available as recipes. Much
is just simplifications to the underlying code to take better
advantage of cutting edge concepts in PmWiki.

I'd rather discuss the features offlist.  But again, check out the
specs, and tear them to shreds if you want. I'd be very grateful.
Except for the search mechanism, the code is probably 90% done and
working exactly as intended/hoped.

Cheers,
Dan

PS.  As Dominique's incisive question cut to the quick for me
personally, I think I simply MUST drop defending my naming choices to
the community. Good grief!  Dominique, thank you for that welcome slap
back to reality!  Much appreciated...