Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Fossil SCM vs Write.as, the Slant community recommends Write.as for most people. In the question“What are the best solutions for a personal blog?” Write.as is ranked 14th while Fossil SCM is ranked 28th. The most important reason people chose Write.as is:
Works totally anonymously or you can sign up with a pen name.
Specs
Question 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 Protects your privacy
Works totally anonymously or you can sign up with a pen name.
Pro No sign up required
You can publish without ever signing up or giving out your email address.
Pro Clean writing space
It's made for writing, so there aren't crazy buttons and alerts all over the place to distract you.
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 Very simple
The editor only lets you write plain text, select from a few fonts, and use Markdown for formatting. It's difficult to use Write.as for more complicated blogging or creating a full website.
Con The writing space is very limited
The writing window is limited to only about one-fifth of the page, the rest is just blank. You can only see about three lines of text at a time. Seems like a mismanaging of space.
