When comparing Fossil SCM vs Acrylamid, the Slant community recommends Fossil SCM for most people. In the question“What are the best solutions for a personal blog?” Fossil SCM is ranked 28th while Acrylamid is ranked 29th. The most important reason people chose Fossil SCM is:
While most other platforms allow either online blogging, or development offline and hosting on some other platform, fossil allows you to develop locally, host it locally, view it locally, and you can substitue locally with remote if you want to. It's just one file. Fossil.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro All in one
While most other platforms allow either online blogging, or development offline and hosting on some other platform, fossil allows you to develop locally, host it locally, view it locally, and you can substitue locally with remote if you want to.
It's just one file. Fossil.
Pro Free
It is. It is also free as in libre, as in the license is similar (or equivilant) to BSD-2
Pro Simple to use
Fossil doesn't depend on a specific language to be present on the target or development system. Just write, commit, and done.
Pro Support reStructuredText, Markdown, and Textile
Pro Static site generator
Content can be hosted anywhere.
Cons
Con You have to do everything manually and know what you're doing
It is similar to the "Writing your own solution" option
Con Not widely used
There is not a lot of activity.