On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:51:11 +0300, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
First of all, thank you Thomas (and you Richard!) for such a nice feature.
Regarding name of the command I'm agree 'service' and 'server' commands
are confusing, since theya re very close by meanings. However, I don't
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 09:18:29PM -0700, Jeremy Anderson wrote:
Out of curiosity, why are you converting from mercurial?
I ask because my friends and I adopted fossil and other friends of ours are
asking us why we didn't go with mercurial instead. I didn't really have a
good answer, apart
On 19.07.2011 06:16, Jeremy Anderson wrote:
Other platforms could either re-direct it (e.g., fossil service becomes an
alias for fossil server), or just print a message saying that the command
is only valid for Windows operating systems.
On non Windows platforms, fossil service prints the
Hi,
Many thanks for your answers, it turns out I got extremely confused by
not paying enough attention to a fossil warning.
* Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org [20110719 00:52]:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Joan Picanyol i Puig
lists-fos...@biaix.org wrote:
I've stumbled upon a situation
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Joan Picanyol i Puig
lists-fos...@biaix.org wrote:
Another solution is to use the edit feature of the web interface to
manually change the timestamps of the far-in-the-future check-ins to
something more reasonable.
Wow! Talk about rewriting history :p
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Jeremy Anderson jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, why are you converting from mercurial?
I ask because my friends and I adopted fossil and other friends of ours are
asking us why we didn't go with mercurial instead. I didn't really have a
good
* Jeremy Anderson jere...@gmail.com [20110719 06:18]:
Out of curiosity, why are you converting from mercurial?
1) plain C, single binary
2) integrated wiki ticketing
The big minus for me which still keeps me on mercurial for some stuff is
the lack of hooks for significant events (commit/update
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 05:35:13AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
(3) Fossil gives you a timeline to help track your project. If Mercurial
does this, I've never seen it.
Well, there is 'hgk'.
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/HgkExtension
Mercurial also comes with a python web script, that gives
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Joan Picanyol i Puig
lists-fos...@biaix.org wrote:
Many thanks for your answers, it turns out I got extremely confused by
not paying enough attention to a fossil warning.
Did Fossil give a warning about the times between the 2 PCs not being in sync?
On Jul 19, 2011, at 09:38 , Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
I have a big lack of faith for interpreted languages with modules like python.
First, they run unnecessarily slow (some say, that they allow developing
faster,
but I don't agree) and take unnecessarily big amounts of memory.
Second,
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Jeremy Anderson jere...@gmail.com wrote:
I currently host fossil server as a window service via NSSM. fossil
service gets my vote. simple to the point.
i would argue for the win prefix because 'service' is used on other
platforms as well, e.g. Solaris SMF
* Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com [20110719 14:28]:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Joan Picanyol i Puig
lists-fos...@biaix.org wrote:
Many thanks for your answers, it turns out I got extremely confused by
not paying enough attention to a fossil warning.
Did Fossil give a warning about
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
(2) The fossil ui and fossil serve commands are easier to use and
provide much more information than the hg serve command.
Let's not forget:
(2.5) The ability to run Fossil over a CGI.
This has been THE killer feature for
Why not make an option e.g.
fossil server -service?
--
Rene
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Thanks, mike. :)
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Mike Meyer m...@mired.org wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:18:29 -0700
Jeremy Anderson jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, why are you converting from mercurial?
While you weren't asking me, I converted from mercurial (and did the
hg
Unless you're on windows+IIS. Then it takes hours. And maybe then it doesn't
even work... :)
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
(2) The fossil ui and fossil serve commands are easier
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Jeremy Anderson jere...@gmail.com wrote:
Unless you're on windows+IIS. Then it takes hours. And maybe then it
doesn't even work... :)
Is that an issue with IIS or with Fossil? If the problem is with Fossil,
please suggest changes we can make so that Fossil
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Rene renew...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Why not make an option e.g.
fossil server -service?
+1 :)
--
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
___
fossil-users mailing list
On 19.07.2011 15:42, Rene wrote:
Why not make an option e.g.
fossil server -service?
because the service command consists of several sub-commands?
--
tsbg
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
To be fair, I'm being glib - it probably works fine if properly configured,
but configuring CGI plugins on IIS is not a straightforward task. I tinkered
with it for an afternoon and only got so far as IIS loading an instance of
fossil.exe for each inbound request. Sadly, the .exes would just sit
-
* Jeremy Anderson jere...@gmail.com [20110719 06:18]:
Out of curiosity, why are you converting from mercurial?
1) plain C, single binary
2) integrated wiki ticketing
The big minus for me which still keeps me on mercurial for some stuff is
the lack of hooks for significant events
Pretty good list. A few comments below on a couple of them (I switched
from git to mercurial and then to fossil).
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 5:35 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
(3) Fossil gives you a timeline to help track your project. If Mercurial
does this, I've never seen it.
To quote Donald Knuth: the root of all evil is premature optimization.
Is service really that confusing? imho service is the term that windows
users would be most familiar with; perhaps it can be given a try first
before being rejected as confusing. If it doesn't work out, perhaps svc is
a
On 7/19/2011 11:27 AM, Paul wrote:
Is service really that confusing?
I'm more concerned that `fossil serv` becomes ambiguous. (fossil allows
unambiguous short versions of all its commands.)
--
Joshua Paine
LetterBlock: Web Applications Built With Joy
http://letterblock.com/
301-576-1920
I'm not sure. I mentioned on another thread fiber that I battled it for
hours and only got as far as getting fossil to spawn. I don't know why it
never came back... and I figured why use IIS just to host fossil when it
has a web server [that works properly with itself] built in? =)
On Tue, Jul
To quote Donald Knuth: the root of all evil is premature optimization.
Although the quote is nice and applicable to many situations, I
think that this is absolutely not the case.
The problem is not to make a type of optimization, the problem is
that it is necessary to make a decision
I wanted to share some scripts I whipped up to make traversing my fossil
checkouts easier in Windows. If Richard et al., want to add these kinds of
commands to the fossil.exe directly, i'm all for it... I just wanted to
share what's making my fossil use easier until then. =)
*root.cmd*
This walks
On 19.07.2011 17:47, Ramon Ribó wrote:
In my opinion, the name service is too generic and too windows
specific. Fossil can give us a lot of services, apart from using the
Windows services feature.
I agree with another poster that a good solution could be to make it
a subcommand of server.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Thomas Schnurrenberger t...@gmx.net wrote:
It is probably better to change the command-name from service
to e.g. winsvc
+1 vote for winsvc/winserve/winservice (no hyphen)
___
fossil-users mailing list
I vote for
fossil server --service
or something similar.
-Original Message-
From: Wes Freeman
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 12:18 PM
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] The fossil service command
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Thomas Schnurrenberger
fossil server ?-P|--port TCPPORT? ?--service-install?
?--service-remove? ?REPOSITORY?
I don't think that this a good idea because the service command
has several sub-commands.
It is probably better to change the command-name from service
to e.g. winsvc
Althouth winsvc could also be a good
Just read through the code. Got a few comments:
These errors:
if( g.argc4 ) fossil_fatal(to much arguments for delete method.);
if( g.argc4 ) fossil_fatal(to much arguments for show method.);
if( g.argc4 ) fossil_fatal(to much arguments for create method.);
if( g.argc4 ) fossil_fatal(to much
On 19.07.2011 18:36, Ramon Ribó wrote:
Althouth winsvc could also be a good solution, what other sub commands,
appart
from install and remove do you really need?
You don't need the service command at all. There are command line
utilities and/or GUI's in the Windows OS which have the required
The fossil service command is a convenience command for Windows users
who
are not system administrators. It concentrates the necessary functionality
where it
is needed
I agree with it. So my proposal was to add the minimal functionality to the
command:
fossil server --install-service
fossil
34 matches
Mail list logo
