On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 22:25:33 +0200, Chad Perrin <c...@apotheon.net> wrote:
This "Fossil For New Users" intro to doing the basics in Fossil was a
few minutes' work, in part as a reminder for myself. I thought it might
be useful for others as well, though, so I finally decided to put it
online.
http://blogstrapping.com/?page=2013.220.13.42.53
Let me know what you think. If there are any problems I'll try to fix
I only had a quick look so this is only a very preliminary feedback:
you write:
8<-----------------------------------
A smart move might be to designate a directory where you want to store
most of your repository files, and initialize new repositories there.
These are not the checked out source code files for a project. Unlike most
popular DVCSes, Fossil has a separate project database file on any system
where you want to have checkouts. This has some advantages (such as making
it extremely easy to make backups without having whole checked out source
trees, for instance, just by copying the repository database file), though
some people might find it strange at first. I typically use ~/frepos
(that's a "frepos", for "fossil repositories", directory inside my home
directory) as the location where I store my repository files. Your mileage
may vary; this is entirely a personal choice.
8<------------------------------------
these remarks:
1.
the "Unlike most popular DVCSes..." is a bit misleading. all of them have
a database for each checkout, of course, but not in a single file. backing
them up is not really that much more complicated. I would try to emphasize
a bit more that the difference is indeed that fossil uses a "monolithic"
database, i.e. a single file instead of a directory tree and that has
indeed some advantages if you only use `cp' since you don't run into
permission issues.
2.
I'm not comfortable with categorically recommending to new users to
separate the database from the checkout. I know that many on this list
think this to be a good thing but in general (as opposed to "for special
use cases") I don't think there is any advantage. keeping the database
within
the checkout (just as the others (git, hg, bzr, ...) do, has advantages,
too (e.g. ability to move the whole thing around without closing/reopening
the repo) and also allows to identify a checkout as being (or having been)
under fossil control even when the repo is closed.
so, I would mention both possibilities as being equally viable and it
being mostly a matter of taste which to choose. (e.g., my preference is to
put all the databases with a default name into the checkout dir (I use
`.fslrepo') and put the "server-side clones" in a common
location/directory. that works very well for me and would indeed not
recommend to locally separate the databases from their checkouts).
regards,
joerg
them.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
