Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase

[Eric]

> Git rebase help has a very good graphic to explain what it does:
>
> Assume the following history exists and the current branch is "topic":
>
>   A---B---C topic
>  /
> D---E---F---G master
>
> From this point, the result of either of the following commands:
>
> git rebase master
> git rebase master topic
> would be:
>
>   A'--B'--C' topic
>  /
> D---E---F---G master
>
> Here, git forgets versions A, B & C if they are not published (tagged).
> I agree we don't want fossil to forget anything.
>
> However, if fossil can do following, that would be very helpful:
>
> A---B---C topic
>/
>   /   A'--B'--C' (new name)
>  /   /
> D---E---F---G trunk
>
> - Altu
>


But why would anyone want to do that?

E.

___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase

[altufaltu]

Git rebase help has a very good graphic to explain what it does:

Assume the following history exists and the current branch is "topic":

  A---B---C topic
 /
D---E---F---G master

From this point, the result of either of the following commands:

git rebase master
git rebase master topic
would be:

  A'--B'--C' topic
 /
D---E---F---G master

Here, git forgets versions A, B & C if they are not published (tagged).
I agree we don't want fossil to forget anything.

However, if fossil can do following, that would be very helpful:

A---B---C topic
   /
  /   A'--B'--C' (new name)
 /   /
D---E---F---G trunk

- Altu


-Original Message-
From: Richard Hipp 
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 4:44 pm
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase





On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:42 AM,   wrote:
Well, my understanding of rebase has changed since then, due to the
same problem we faced. Git 'forgets' unpublished versions when doing
rebase (but it need not - I may still be wrong here). I'm sure if
fossil implements rebase, it will not forget old versions.

What I'm interested in is the 'feature' of rebase where it can re-apply
changes to a new a new head. The result may be in a new branch.



You cannot change history in Fossil, except you can correct typos in 
check-in comments and move a check-in into a new branch.  But even 
those changes are recorded so that you can see them in a history of the 
repository.  The inability to rewrite history is an important and 
deliberate feature - not a limitation or bug.

If you want nice clean changes in your main tree, you can do most of 
your development work in a branch (call it "experimental" for example) 
and then periodically merge the experimental changes into the trunk.  
We do that a lot on SQLite.  We strive to make sure that every check-in 
on trunk compiles and works, and so intermediate check-ins used for 
sharing or as works in progress are put on branches and are not moved 
onto the trunk until they are ready.  That way, we can "bisect" on the 
trunk and all our historical trunk versions will actually compile and 
work.  And, we can look at the merge diff to see an aggregate 
difference for some major change.

Sometimes a check-in or two will go onto the trunk (because that is 
default action) but then we will realize that those check-ins should 
have been on a development branch.  This is easy to fix by changing the 
branch of those check-ins.

Sometimes a check-in occurs that we decide later to abandon.  This can 
be done by moving that check-in into a branch that we typically call 
"mistake".

 

- Altu



-Original Message-
From: Eric 
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 12:27 pm
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase


> Hi,>> Is there a rebase feature in fossil that is similar to git
rebase? If> not, is it planned?>> - AltuAnd what is different

sincehttp://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg017

89.html?Eric___fossil-users
mailing

listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi



-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users





--
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org


___fossil-users mailing 
listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi
-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
  
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] Windows build broken?

[altufaltu]

Thanks. This works correctly.


-Original Message-
From: Richard Hipp 
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] Windows build broken?





On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:43 AM,   wrote:
Hi DRH,

I can build fossil from trunk now.

However, there seems some issue with date/time. It shows incorrect date:


You're right.  This was a bug in the current-time implementation of 
SQLite on windows.  It has now been fixed (both in SQLite and in 
Fossil).  Please try again.

--
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org


___fossil-users mailing 
listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi
-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
  
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase

[Stephen De Gabrielle]

Thanks, I liked the description of your workflow. You should put it on
the website.

S.

On Wednesday, June 23, 2010, Richard Hipp  wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:42 AM,   wrote:
>
> Well, my understanding of rebase has changed since then, due to the
> same problem we faced. Git 'forgets' unpublished versions when doing
> rebase (but it need not - I may still be wrong here). I'm sure if
> fossil implements rebase, it will not forget old versions.
>
> What I'm interested in is the 'feature' of rebase where it can re-apply
> changes to a new a new head. The result may be in a new branch.
>
>
> You cannot change history in Fossil, except you can correct typos in check-in 
> comments and move a check-in into a new branch.  But even those changes are 
> recorded so that you can see them in a history of the repository.  The 
> inability to rewrite history is an important and deliberate feature - not a 
> limitation or bug.
>
> If you want nice clean changes in your main tree, you can do most of your 
> development work in a branch (call it "experimental" for example) and then 
> periodically merge the experimental changes into the trunk.  We do that a lot 
> on SQLite.  We strive to make sure that every check-in on trunk compiles and 
> works, and so intermediate check-ins used for sharing or as works in progress 
> are put on branches and are not moved onto the trunk until they are ready.  
> That way, we can "bisect" on the trunk and all our historical trunk versions 
> will actually compile and work.  And, we can look at the merge diff to see an 
> aggregate difference for some major change.
>
> Sometimes a check-in or two will go onto the trunk (because that is default 
> action) but then we will realize that those check-ins should have been on a 
> development branch.  This is easy to fix by changing the branch of those 
> check-ins.
>
> Sometimes a check-in occurs that we decide later to abandon.  This can be 
> done by moving that check-in into a branch that we typically call "mistake".
>
>
>
>
> - Altu
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric 
> To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 12:27 pm
> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase
>
>
>> Hi,>> Is there a rebase feature in fossil that is similar to git
> rebase? If> not, is it planned?>> - AltuAnd what is different
> sincehttp://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg017
> 89.html?Eric___fossil-users
> mailing
> listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi
> -bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>
>
> --
> -
> D. Richard Hipp
> d...@sqlite.org
>

-- 

--
Stephen De Gabrielle
stephen.degabrie...@acm.org
Telephone +44 (0)20 85670911
Mobile+44 (0)79 85189045
http://www.degabrielle.name/stephen
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] Windows build broken?

[Richard Hipp]

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:43 AM,  wrote:

> Hi DRH,
>
> I can build fossil from trunk now.
>
> However, there seems some issue with date/time. It shows incorrect date:
>

You're right.  This was a bug in the current-time implementation of SQLite
on windows.  It has now been fixed (both in SQLite and in Fossil).  Please
try again.

-- 
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] Windows build broken?

[altufaltu]

Hi DRH,

I can build fossil from trunk now.

However, there seems some issue with date/time. It shows incorrect date:

$ rm test.fsl
$ ./fossil new test.fsl
project-id: 6e13be383106646451d79a5eae4f731c84d22135
server-id:  f0202d8c43fc11569996c45150aca4740ffd49c6
admin-user: altufaltu (initial password is "df")
$ ./fossil timeline -R test.fsl
=== 5695-10-01 ===<-- incorrect
02:47:22 [27672aa945] initial empty check-in (user: a0756885 tags: 
trunk)
$ ./fossil version
This is fossil version [d778ffea81] 2010-06-23 13:30:32 UTC

Older version works well:
$ rm test.fsl
$ ./fossil new test.fsl
project-id: 8c9e5b041a9dceb16117a8bfc876f1d0f4b18190
server-id:  c1b0500b000a2f7356065962422c5f4500e6ea4c
admin-user: altufaltu (initial password is "b52440")
$ ./fossil timeline -R test.fsl
=== 2010-06-23 ===
14:40:32 [4a09f9f5b6] initial empty check-in (user: a0756885 tags: 
trunk)
$ ./fossil version
This is fossil version [15b293259d] 2010-06-11 12:02:59 UTC

-Original Message-
From: Richard Hipp 
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 5:04 pm
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] Windows build broken?





On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Richard Hipp  wrote:



On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:44 AM,   wrote:
I'm trying to build 953d293c32 version of fossil for Windows, which
seems broken:

gcc -g -O2 -o makeheaders .\\src\\makeheaders.c
awk "{ printf \"#define MANIFEST_UUID \\\"%%s\\\"\n\", $1}"
.\\src\\..\\manifest.uuid >VERSION.h
gawk: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
gawk:                                             ^ syntax error
gawk: cmd. line:1: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
gawk: cmd. line:1:                                              ^
unexpected newline or end of string
make: *** [VERSION.h] Error 1


The last change to that part of the makefile was in 2007.  Are you 
saying this used to work for you but it suddenly stopped working?  Have 
you changed your build environment?



At the time I wrote the paragraph above, I had not yet seen last nights 
check-in from Mr. Morgat.  That check-in does indeed break the build, 
and on unix too.  So it has been moved into a branch.  Please build off 
of the trunk and you should be OK.
 


 

- Altu
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users






--
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org





--
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org


___fossil-users mailing 
listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi
-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
  
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] Windows build broken?

[Richard Hipp]

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Richard Hipp  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:44 AM,  wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to build 953d293c32 version of fossil for Windows, which
>> seems broken:
>>
>> gcc -g -O2 -o makeheaders .\\src\\makeheaders.c
>> awk "{ printf \"#define MANIFEST_UUID \\\"%%s\\\"\n\", $1}"
>> .\\src\\..\\manifest.uuid >VERSION.h
>> gawk: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
>> gawk: ^ syntax error
>> gawk: cmd. line:1: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
>> gawk: cmd. line:1:  ^
>> unexpected newline or end of string
>> make: *** [VERSION.h] Error 1
>>
>
> The last change to that part of the makefile was in 2007.  Are you saying
> this used to work for you but it suddenly stopped working?  Have you changed
> your build environment?
>

At the time I wrote the paragraph above, I had not yet seen last nights
check-in from Mr. Morgat.  That check-in does indeed break the build, and on
unix too.  So it has been moved into a branch.  Please build off of the
trunk and you should be OK.


>
>
>
>>
>> - Altu
>> ___
>> fossil-users mailing list
>> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
>> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -
> D. Richard Hipp
> d...@sqlite.org
>



-- 
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] Windows build broken?

[Richard Hipp]

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:44 AM,  wrote:

> I'm trying to build 953d293c32 version of fossil for Windows, which
> seems broken:
>
> gcc -g -O2 -o makeheaders .\\src\\makeheaders.c
> awk "{ printf \"#define MANIFEST_UUID \\\"%%s\\\"\n\", $1}"
> .\\src\\..\\manifest.uuid >VERSION.h
> gawk: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
> gawk: ^ syntax error
> gawk: cmd. line:1: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
> gawk: cmd. line:1:  ^
> unexpected newline or end of string
> make: *** [VERSION.h] Error 1
>

The last change to that part of the makefile was in 2007.  Are you saying
this used to work for you but it suddenly stopped working?  Have you changed
your build environment?



>
> - Altu
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>



-- 
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase

[Richard Hipp]

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:42 AM,  wrote:

> Well, my understanding of rebase has changed since then, due to the
> same problem we faced. Git 'forgets' unpublished versions when doing
> rebase (but it need not - I may still be wrong here). I'm sure if
> fossil implements rebase, it will not forget old versions.
>
> What I'm interested in is the 'feature' of rebase where it can re-apply
> changes to a new a new head. The result may be in a new branch.
>


You cannot change history in Fossil, except you can correct typos in
check-in comments and move a check-in into a new branch.  But even those
changes are recorded so that you can see them in a history of the
repository.  The inability to rewrite history is an important and deliberate
feature - not a limitation or bug.

If you want nice clean changes in your main tree, you can do most of your
development work in a branch (call it "experimental" for example) and then
periodically merge the experimental changes into the trunk.  We do that a
lot on SQLite.  We strive to make sure that every check-in on trunk compiles
and works, and so intermediate check-ins used for sharing or as works in
progress are put on branches and are not moved onto the trunk until they are
ready.  That way, we can "bisect" on the trunk and all our historical trunk
versions will actually compile and work.  And, we can look at the merge diff
to see an aggregate difference for some major change.

Sometimes a check-in or two will go onto the trunk (because that is default
action) but then we will realize that those check-ins should have been on a
development branch.  This is easy to fix by changing the branch of those
check-ins.

Sometimes a check-in occurs that we decide later to abandon.  This can be
done by moving that check-in into a branch that we typically call "mistake".



>
> - Altu
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric 
> To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 12:27 pm
> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase
>
>
> > Hi,>> Is there a rebase feature in fossil that is similar to git
> rebase? If> not, is it planned?>> - AltuAnd what is different
> sincehttp://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg017
> 89.html?Eric___fossil-users
> mailing
> listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi
> -bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>



-- 
-
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] A lightweight plain skin for Fossil: Plain Wedding

[Dig412]

This is a really nice theme, thanks for releasing it!

On 21 June 2010 16:12,  wrote:

> I have to say I'd love to see this skin incorporated, very nice work.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: "Richard Hipp" 
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 11:01am
> To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] A lightweight plain skin for Fossil: Plain
> Wedding
>
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Peter Krantz  >wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 16:45, Richard Hipp  wrote:
> >
> > > If you can make *specific* suggestions on how to make Fossil easier to
> > > style, I will likely implement them.
> > >
> >
> > I was just trying to find info on the preferred method to submit
> > patches. Should they go with tickets or can they be sent to the list?
> > Or should I just create a ticket to explain what could be done?
> >
>
> Send patches directly to me or open a ticket.  Whichever is easiest for
> you.
>
>
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Peter
> > ___
> > fossil-users mailing list
> > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -
> D. Richard Hipp
> d...@sqlite.org
>
>
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

[fossil-users] Windows build broken?

[altufaltu]

I'm trying to build 953d293c32 version of fossil for Windows, which 
seems broken:

gcc -g -O2 -o makeheaders .\\src\\makeheaders.c
awk "{ printf \"#define MANIFEST_UUID \\\"%%s\\\"\n\", $1}"  
.\\src\\..\\manifest.uuid >VERSION.h
gawk: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
gawk: ^ syntax error
gawk: cmd. line:1: { printf "#define MANIFEST_UUID \"%%s\"\n", }
gawk: cmd. line:1:  ^ 
unexpected newline or end of string
make: *** [VERSION.h] Error 1

- Altu
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase

[altufaltu]

Well, my understanding of rebase has changed since then, due to the 
same problem we faced. Git 'forgets' unpublished versions when doing 
rebase (but it need not - I may still be wrong here). I'm sure if 
fossil implements rebase, it will not forget old versions.

What I'm interested in is the 'feature' of rebase where it can re-apply 
changes to a new a new head. The result may be in a new branch.

- Altu


-Original Message-
From: Eric 
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 12:27 pm
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase


> Hi,>> Is there a rebase feature in fossil that is similar to git 
rebase? If> not, is it planned?>> - AltuAnd what is different 
sincehttp://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg017
89.html?Eric___fossil-users 
mailing 
listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi
-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
  
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users