Good day to the parliament of RedCloth followers gathered here. Grave matters at hand!! I''m personally quite unhappy with the state of RedCloth and am reluctant to release the code in the repository. I can''t say if the code works with any confidence because I can''t generate the (Poignant) Guide with the current RedCloth. I know some things are fixed, but I''m afraid that much is still broken. I think I''d rather re-release 3.0.3 as 3.0.5, you know? So, my first question is: what to do with the RedCloth 3.x series?? --- The next pressing item is SuperRedCloth.[1] This library is much faster, much cleaner, but also much smaller. I don''t plan on supporting DocBook or any other formats other than true XHTML. If you want to convert to DocBook, i''d suggest XHTML-to-DocBook. Most importantly, I want SuperRC to be small and performant. Compatibility with RedCloth 3.0.3 is very important to me as well. All of 3.0.3''s tests should come out identical to SuperRC. So, my second question: are you guys okay with SuperRC becoming RedCloth 4 eventually? Thanks for hanging in there!! _why
I am in total support of SuperRC becoming RedCloth 4. _why, you have my support. -Lucas http://rufy.com/ On Jan 23, 2007, at 1:37 PM, why the lucky stiff wrote:> Good day to the parliament of RedCloth followers gathered here. > Grave matters at hand!! > > I''m personally quite unhappy with the state of RedCloth and am > reluctant to release the code in the repository. I can''t say if the > code works with any confidence because I can''t generate the > (Poignant) Guide with the current RedCloth. I know some things are > fixed, but I''m afraid that much is still broken. I think I''d rather > re-release 3.0.3 as 3.0.5, you know? > > So, my first question is: what to do with the RedCloth 3.x series?? > > --- > > The next pressing item is SuperRedCloth.[1] This library is much > faster, much cleaner, but also much smaller. I don''t plan on > supporting DocBook or any other formats other than true XHTML. If > you want to convert to DocBook, i''d suggest XHTML-to-DocBook. Most > importantly, I want SuperRC to be small and performant. > > Compatibility with RedCloth 3.0.3 is very important to me as well. > All of 3.0.3''s tests should come out identical to SuperRC. > > So, my second question: are you guys okay with SuperRC becoming > RedCloth 4 eventually? > > Thanks for hanging in there!! > > _why > _______________________________________________ > Redcloth-upwards mailing list > Redcloth-upwards at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/redcloth-upwards
> > So, my second question: are you guys okay with SuperRC becoming > > RedCloth 4 eventually?I''m all for that. --Dylan
I''m not familiar with superrc, where can I find out more?
As an aside: In my app I used textilize and had all sorts of issues
(Rails 1.2 rc2 and rc 3.0.4) (headings not terminating, lists not
terminating, etc). I changed it to directly call rc as
RedCloth.new("xxx").to_html and it worked much better.
Joe
> -----Original Message-----
> From: redcloth-upwards-bounces at rubyforge.org
> [mailto:redcloth-upwards-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of
> why the lucky stiff
> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 1:38 PM
> To: redcloth-upwards at rubyforge.org
> Subject: RedCloth and SuperRedCloth
>
> Good day to the parliament of RedCloth followers gathered here.
> Grave matters at hand!!
>
> I''m personally quite unhappy with the state of RedCloth and
> am reluctant to release the code in the repository. I can''t
> say if the code works with any confidence because I can''t generate
the
> (Poignant) Guide with the current RedCloth. I know some
> things are fixed, but I''m afraid that much is still broken.
> I think I''d rather re-release 3.0.3 as 3.0.5, you know?
>
> So, my first question is: what to do with the RedCloth 3.x series??
>
> ---
>
> The next pressing item is SuperRedCloth.[1] This library is
> much faster, much cleaner, but also much smaller. I don''t
> plan on supporting DocBook or any other formats other than
> true XHTML. If you want to convert to DocBook, i''d suggest
> XHTML-to-DocBook. Most importantly, I want SuperRC to be
> small and performant.
>
> Compatibility with RedCloth 3.0.3 is very important to me as well.
> All of 3.0.3''s tests should come out identical to SuperRC.
>
> So, my second question: are you guys okay with SuperRC
> becoming RedCloth 4 eventually?
>
> Thanks for hanging in there!!
>
> _why
> _______________________________________________
> Redcloth-upwards mailing list
> Redcloth-upwards at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/redcloth-upwards
>
On 23-Jan-07, at 3:01 PM, Dylan Bennett wrote:>>> So, my second question: are you guys okay with SuperRC becoming >>> RedCloth 4 eventually? > > I''m all for that.yay!
> re-release 3.0.3 as 3.0.5, you know?I would be for that, although I think the code in the rep is definitely neater than the 3.0.3/4.> So, my second question: are you guys okay with SuperRC becoming > RedCloth 4 eventually?I added an extension of my own to parse links consisting of two parts "wo":link;"rd":another_link;, and it''ll be hard to add this to the new one without constant patching or private forking, so I''m ambiguous about it. It would be great if some way to set/add rules remained in place. greetings, Wybo Wiersma> Thanks for hanging in there!! > > _why-- ::Student: - History, Informatiekunde (computer linguistics, IR, webtech) and Philosophy - Member of the Center for Metahistory Groningen (http://www.rug.nl/let/cmg) ::Free Software and Open Source Developer: - http://www.LogiLogi.org, innovative system for cumulative, shared commenting, publication and idea sharing: Web as it should be... - ComLinToo, a computational linguistics toolset written in Perl - Lake (LogiLogi.org Make), a make-replacement using makefiles in pure C++ ::Being: - In the world, go figure (http://nl.logilogi.org/HomE/WyboWiersma)
> I can''t say if the code works with any confidence because I can''t > generate the > (Poignant) Guide with the current RedCloth. I know some things are > fixed, but > I''m afraid that much is still broken.Why can''t you generate the Poignant Guide? What problems are you experiencing with the latest RedCloth? I checked out poignant/trunk and it seemed to generate just fine for me, but I''m sure I don''t have a clue compared to you.> I think I''d rather re-release 3.0.3 as 3.0.5, you know?I''d rather keep forward momentum, but failing that, re-releasing 3.0.3 is better than keeping 3.0.4 out there.> So, my first question is: what to do with the RedCloth 3.x series??Depends on how badly it''s broken. Are there ways we can find out? Trunk is working great for me, but I haven''t written any books with it either.> Compatibility with RedCloth 3.0.3 is very important to me as well.Proper functioning of :filter_html and :hard_breaks are very important to me. Filter HTML is important because... # This is a nice thing if you''re using RedCloth for # formatting in public places (e.g. Wikis) where you # don''t want users to abuse HTML for bad things. SuperRC should include these options (and tests for them), IMHO.> So, my second question: are you guys okay with SuperRC becoming > RedCloth 4 eventually?That would be amazing. It being Ragel makes it less "open," but as long as it works well, speed is huge. Who knows, maybe it''ll stimulate more people to learn Ragel? Jason -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/redcloth-upwards/attachments/20070123/a133016a/attachment.html