- **Symlinks**. i have always strongly disagreed with the addition of symlink support into fossil: platform-specific constructs simply have no place in the core of any SCM (with the "effectively necessary" exception of the executable bit). For platforms which don't support symlinks, fossil stores/manages them as plain text files with a single line holding the name of the referenced file. This is *very likely* the route the library will take, especially since the hassles symlink handling caused fossil in late 2020 (long story). Probably the only way the library will support proper symlinks is if someone who uses that feature adds it.

- **Backlinks**. Crosslinking "should" update the internal list of backlinks from certain text fields, but doing so requires parsing wiki/markdown-format text. See [`backlink.c` in the fossil tree](https://fossil-scm.org/home/file?name=src/backlink.c&ci=trunk) for the gory details. On the other hand, backlinks support only requires parsing wiki links, not the full grammar, so it might not be as painful as it initially sounds... though somewhat more for markdown, where we're required to do a multi-pass scan to handle its linking model. (Technically, we'd also need to handle verbatim blocks to avoid parsing links inside those blocks, but that's a corner case.)

- **Ticket support**. Ticket handling is surprisingly complicated, due largely to the customizability of the ticket database schema. If fossil-compatible ticket supports gets added to libfossil, it will very likely be because someone other than myself adds it! The core artifact data structure supports tickets, so the bits required for adding it are in place.

# Optimizations

- Artifact crosslinking, and maybe (not yet sure) parsing, is much slower in libfossil than fossil. Some of this is easily attributable to more abstraction layers, but certainly not all of it. Some optimization of crosslinking speed is certainly in order. As a point of comparison, try `fossil rebuild` vs `f-parseparty --crosslink`. The latter is much, much slower.

# Remote Synchronization

- This will(?) be implemented in terms of abstract streaming APIs, very possibly the ones the library already uses for the majority of its file I/O and abstracting output streaming (e.g. it uses an abstract output stream for diff output, rather than writing directly to a buffer).

- This will almost certainly be one of the last major features.