On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:13:15 -0500 Leo Razoumov <slonik...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually I stand corrected. > > $ fossil diff --new-file --from P1-parent --to P3 | patch -E > > should add/remove text files automatically. Binary files, on the other > hand still pose a problem. OK. Thanks. > I used Hg briefly few years ago. Now I abandoned Hg completely and am > an active GIT user for my heavy lifting projects. I recently > discovered fossil and find it very refreshing and intriguing. I simply cannot stand Git considering it's too complex as a DVCS tool forcing one to think more about the the tool than I'm ready to do. Maybe I'm just spoiled with Darcs. ;) > One thing that I miss in fossil above everything else is inability to > push/pull individual branches or/and individual artifacts. This is > really big item on my wish list. Current fossil model has only two > choices: public branches that are accessible to all, and private > branches that are for-your-eyes-only. Afaik, it's possible to push private branches as well, but, I agree, Fossil is mostly 'all or nothing'. I'd like to be able to get rid (or as HG says 'close') of old experimental branches whose patches are applied to the trunk without the need to resort too many different hacks. > But I need few branches that I share with my team members but do not > leak outside of the company. Fossil provides no mechanism to support > such a work-flow. Right. I'd like to have simple 'rollback' as well in a situation when I quickly find out that the commit was simply mistake... Sincerely, Gour -- Therefore, without being attached to the fruits of activities, one should act as a matter of duty, for by working without attachment one attains the Supreme. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
