On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Gour <g...@atmarama.net> wrote: > In any case, my opinion is that having SVN <---> Fossil is much more > interested than Git <---> Fossil 'cause, imho, with Fossil one can make > very familiar/similar workflow like the one used with SVN.
Some SVN features not in Fossil: Tagging files. SVN allows properties to be attached to files as well as to commits. SVN properties are similar to Fossil tags. Fossil's artifact structure would support tagging files, but Fossil has no command to do this. SVN users might want this feature. However, simply enhancing the tag command to allow this could cause confusion when searching for a commit by tag. Copying files. "svn cp a b" copies a to b then adds b as a new file with history. That, when showing the history of b, it will include the history of a from before the copy (including any history a inherited). Again, SVN users might want this. While the 4th field of the F card could be used to "connect" b to a, we might need some way to indicate this was a copy, not a move/rename. There may be more, but this is what I've found so far.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
