[Radiant] Support for future RedCloths

[Sean Cribbs]

Jason,

Updating to the latest is a good idea, but the platform-specific move 
worries me a little.  Also, if we specify gem dependencies and why's 
repository is not in the user's sources, it will bomb.  How would you 
intend to resolve this?

Sean

Jason Garber wrote:
> You probably all know RedCloth has been neglected and messy for a long 
> time.  Radiant ships with RedCloth 3.0.4 in the vendor directory and 
> :hard_breaks left off (the 3.x default, which was a big mistake).  
> Many have hacked their own Textile filter with hard breaks on and 
> additionally hacked RedCloth to get the hard breaks to work.
>
> RedCloth has been getting some lovin' over the last few months, and 
> we're about to release version 4.0.  This release is a total rewrite 
> in Ragel (same thing Mongrel is written in) for really fast parsing.  
> It complies much more closely with Textile-2.0.0 and loses the 
> mixed-in Markdown syntax.  Now'd probably be a good time to test it.
>
> $ gem install RedCloth --source http://code.whytheluckystiff.net
>
> The problem is, Radiant will still use the RedCloth 3.0.4 because it's 
> in the vendor directory.  RedCloth::VERSION will always tell you what 
> version you're running.
>
> I'd like to see Radiant 0.6.5 NOT include RedCloth in the vendor 
> directory because a.) the version it includes is badly broken and b.) 
> it doesn't let you choose which version of RedCloth you want to run or 
> leave room for upgrades.
>
> Is this something that could be sneaked into the 0.6.5 release?  If 
> you're open, I'm glad to work up a patch.
>
> Jason Garber
>
> AIM: JasonGarberEMU
> Skype: JasonGarberEMU
> _______________________________________________
> Radiant mailing list
> Post:   Radiant at radiantcms.org
> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
> Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
>