Ticket UUID: | 67936dc2abc317c54e7bed3b07de0fce6c277511 | ||
Title: | Fossil SCM as a NoSQL database instead of CouchDB | ||
Status: | Closed | Type: | Documentation |
Severity: | Important | Priority: | |
Subsystem: | Resolution: | Not_A_Bug | |
Last Modified: | 2011-09-08 22:32:11 | ||
Version Found In: | |||
Description & Comments: | |||
Hi all,
Sorry for using this instead of the mailing list, but is at this moment is just an incidental questions and I don't want to subscribe to another mailing list to just ask a question (I'm planning to use fossil for my development, but not yet). I have being wandering around this project for two months because I think it could be useful as a self contained NoSQL backend for a distributed off-line/on-line web site I'm planning, but I see also that CouchDB 1 is also used in that precise scenario. Most of the time I see the Fossil vs Git comparison that emphasize Fossil as a DVCS, Could you please elaborate about Fossil-SCM vs CouchDB to elaborate about the NoSQL database nature of Fossil, specially in projects where you are working with semistructured data and on/off-line operation. Thanks Offray anonymous added on 2011-01-26 20:34:54 UTC: Thanks Offray dmitry added on 2011-01-27 02:18:33 UTC:
But Fossil is not really a replacement for CouchDB. anonymous added on 2011-01-27 13:57:43 UTC: Cheers, Offray |