Re: [fossil-users] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Ron Wilson]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:16 PM, JR  wrote:

> However, I also merge to trunk fairly frequently so that I usually only
> have to fossil update trunk on a different computer
>

FYI, Fossil, unlike Git (and some others), always syncs the entire
repository (except for  private branches), so all of your (non-private)
branches will be up to date on all your computers.
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Joel Bruick]

Richard Hipp wrote:
FWIW, I don't think I have ever used "fossil checkout" to move to a 
different branch or checkout (which is something I do dozens or 
hundreds of times on a typical working day).  I always use "fossil 
update" (or usually just "fossil up").  I don't even remember why I 
added the "fossil checkout" command.


This is funny, as I also use "fossil update" exclusively and always 
wondered why "fossil checkout" even exists.


___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[JR]

I only use fossil update to move between branches; I have never used
co/checkout and I only use fossil open when opening a cloned repository (I
have only created a new repository once...)  .  I have never had any issues
with it, except for the occasional merge conflict in a settings file (I
keep a lot of daily use scripts with settings files in my fossil repository
- easy to keep everything synced with history).  As for branching, I use
branches for scripts that contain multiple files or are part of a larger
group, so I branch quite frequently.  However, I also merge to trunk fairly
frequently so that I usually only have to fossil update trunk on a
different computer (I use 3 different computers pretty regularly for my
work within fossil).  Of course, I'm just one person working on a
single-user repository, so ymmv.

David, if you are thinking about moving to fossil, I definitely recommend
trying it.  Granted, I came from a "version control system" that was a
vbscript that made a copy of files in a specific folder every time the
contents were modified.  It was very difficult to find history in that, so
I decided to research versioning systems and decided on fossil.  Once I
played with it and figured out the best way to fit it into my workflow, I
could not be happier.  The web interface (which was a requirement for me)
is amazing, and the addition of a free/no-hassle wiki and ticketing system
were just bonuses.  I use the wiki pretty extensively for notes not
directly related to my work within fossil.  And I even learned how to
actually build a piece of software from source since the fossil release for
Windows when I started did not support SSL.


JR


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:47 PM, David Mason  wrote:
>
>> 1) It sounds like checkout, open, and update should all be part of the
>> command rationalization discussion as they seem to overlap.  Making
>> them sort-of synonyms but with different default *could* work (e.g.
>> checkout === update -overwite, update === checkout -keep, etc.) i.e.
>> ,...
>>
>
> All true enough. _Changing_ them might be difficult due to historical
> momentum, but maybe we can put together at some some sort of chart or
> comparison/contrast doc of those roughly similar commands. i'm kind of a
> documentation nut, so i've written that down as something to work on in the
> next few days.
>
>
>> 2) I haven't actually used fossil yet... it's on my todo list, but
>> mercurial works well enough that I haven't found the time to change
>> over.  And I don't use branches... Ron and Matt make a strong case for
>> why I perhaps should.  Anyone have a good reference to why and
>> workflows for using branches.  Are branches easier to deal with in
>> fossil?
>>
>
> i can't compare it to hg, but compared to svn, branching in fossil is
> absolute child's play. i don't often use branches, basically only because
> of my own historical momentum, but when i _do_ use them in Fossil i never
> regret it (as i often have/do with svn). Easy peasy.
>
> --
> - stephan beal
> http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
> http://gplus.to/sgbeal
> "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
> those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [fossil-users] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Martin S. Weber]

On 2014-03-20 12:47:35, David Mason wrote:
> Are branches easier to deal with in fossil?

Using hg at work, I completely understand why one would stay away from
branches. Using fossil at home, I completely fail to understand why one
would work on trunk. 

Can't really tell you much about the why except: why do you have drawers
instead of a huge chest? What I usually do is for each experimentation,
I use a branch, and each feature starts as an experiment anyways. So
they get born on a branch. Usually a development of related modifications
that will need some iterations sits on a branch for me until it's feature
complete. Trunk then sees one change bringing in the feature I was working
on. Depending on future work, the branch gets closed afterwards (or not, to
be revisited with further related work).

Regards,
-Martin
___
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] co-developers for libfossil C++ wrapper?

[Stephan Beal]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Stephan Beal  wrote:

> This is for the C++ programmers out there...
>

Follow-up:

a) Thanks to those of you who contacted me off-list. You know who you are.

b) The DB layer has been wrapped up in C++ and a short demo application can
be seen here:

http://fossil.wanderinghorse.net/repos/libfossil/index.cgi/finfo?name=cpp/test.cpp

Feedback on the shape of the API is always welcomed, in particular at this
early stage of development. The header file is here:

http://fossil.wanderinghorse.net/repos/libfossil/index.cgi/finfo?name=include/fossil-scm/fossil.hpp

Happy Hacking!

-- 
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Stephan Beal]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:47 PM, David Mason  wrote:

> 1) It sounds like checkout, open, and update should all be part of the
> command rationalization discussion as they seem to overlap.  Making
> them sort-of synonyms but with different default *could* work (e.g.
> checkout === update -overwite, update === checkout -keep, etc.) i.e.
> ,...
>

All true enough. _Changing_ them might be difficult due to historical
momentum, but maybe we can put together at some some sort of chart or
comparison/contrast doc of those roughly similar commands. i'm kind of a
documentation nut, so i've written that down as something to work on in the
next few days.


> 2) I haven't actually used fossil yet... it's on my todo list, but
> mercurial works well enough that I haven't found the time to change
> over.  And I don't use branches... Ron and Matt make a strong case for
> why I perhaps should.  Anyone have a good reference to why and
> workflows for using branches.  Are branches easier to deal with in
> fossil?
>

i can't compare it to hg, but compared to svn, branching in fossil is
absolute child's play. i don't often use branches, basically only because
of my own historical momentum, but when i _do_ use them in Fossil i never
regret it (as i often have/do with svn). Easy peasy.

-- 
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[David Mason]

This is a very interesting discussion.

1) It sounds like checkout, open, and update should all be part of the
command rationalization discussion as they seem to overlap.  Making
them sort-of synonyms but with different default *could* work (e.g.
checkout === update -overwite, update === checkout -keep, etc.) i.e.
you could always use e.g, checkout, but with various switches, or
always use update with (mostly the same) switches plus the one that
makes it act like checkout.

2) I haven't actually used fossil yet... it's on my todo list, but
mercurial works well enough that I haven't found the time to change
over.  And I don't use branches... Ron and Matt make a strong case for
why I perhaps should.  Anyone have a good reference to why and
workflows for using branches.  Are branches easier to deal with in
fossil?

Thanks,  ../Dave

On 20 March 2014 12:28, Ron Wilson  wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Matt Welland  wrote:
>>
>> A comment to those who find they seldom branch: I use branching and
>> merging extensively as a tool to organize work and enable flights of fancy
>> and exploration. Obviously it depends highly on the problems you are solving
>> but I suspect that if you aren't branching then either you are working on a
>> relatively linear and straightforward problem or you aren't using fossil to
>> its fullest.
>
>
> When I first started using "feature" branches, it took me a while to get
> used to "reseting" my working space to current baseline after finishing and
> committing something. After a while, it became automatic. It is a very
> useful technique, even for "solo" projects.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [fossil-users] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Ron Wilson]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Matt Welland  wrote:

> A comment to those who find they seldom branch: I use branching and
> merging extensively as a tool to organize work and enable flights of fancy
> and exploration. Obviously it depends highly on the problems you are
> solving but I suspect that if you aren't branching then either you are
> working on a relatively linear and straightforward problem or you aren't
> using fossil to its fullest.
>

When I first started using "feature" branches, it took me a while to get
used to "reseting" my working space to current baseline after finishing and
committing something. After a while, it became automatic. It is a very
useful technique, even for "solo" projects.
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Stephan Beal]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Warren Young  wrote:

> Isn't that a sign that these two commands should be rethought a bit?
> Either their functions should be teased apart so they're clearly two
> separate things, or they should be merged into a single command that
> perhaps has options to control how subtleties of the operation take place.
>

That's an interesting point, but there are differences. 'update' will merge
in local changes and checkout overwrites (with a prompt) any local changes
(there are options to modify that, e.g. --keep).


> Part of the problem here is that Fossil uses command verbs used by
> preceding and competing version control systems, and there is no universal
> authority defining these verbs precisely.  Perhaps the distinction between
> update and checkout in Fossil came from trying to emulate the behavior of
> another SCM.  Or, perhaps both verbs were put in as an aid to people used
> to one SCM vs another, and their behaviors later drifted apart.
>

To me there uses were always very clear... until this week when the point
came up that it's possible to use 'up' more or less like checkout ;).


> If it turns out that both commands in Fossil can be merged, I think the
> other verb should remain as an alias.


i think it _sounds_ like that, but the merge-changes vs overwriting them is
a notable difference. A checkout is not much different from "fossil open,"
actually, where "open" defaults to latest version. "open" creates the
checkout db, though, (.fslckout or _FOSSIL_, depending on your settings)
and checkout updates it.

Nonetheless, the point is interesting.

-- 
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Warren Young]

On 3/20/2014 10:05, Matt Welland wrote:


FWIW, I don't think I have ever used "fossil checkout" to move to a
different branch or checkout (which is something I do dozens or
hundreds of times on a typical working day).  I always use "fossil
update" (or usually just "fossil up").  I don't even remember why I
added the "fossil checkout" command.


I've definitely seen issues with "fossil update" that were solved by
doing "fossil checkout"


Isn't that a sign that these two commands should be rethought a bit? 
Either their functions should be teased apart so they're clearly two 
separate things, or they should be merged into a single command that 
perhaps has options to control how subtleties of the operation take place.


Part of the problem here is that Fossil uses command verbs used by 
preceding and competing version control systems, and there is no 
universal authority defining these verbs precisely.  Perhaps the 
distinction between update and checkout in Fossil came from trying to 
emulate the behavior of another SCM.  Or, perhaps both verbs were put in 
as an aid to people used to one SCM vs another, and their behaviors 
later drifted apart.


If it turns out that both commands in Fossil can be merged, I think the 
other verb should remain as an alias.

___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Stephan Beal]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Richard Hipp  wrote:

> FWIW, I don't think I have ever used "fossil checkout" to move to a
> different branch or checkout (which is something I do dozens or hundreds of
> times on a typical working day).  I always use "fossil update" (or usually
> just "fossil up").  I don't even remember why I added the "fossil checkout"
> command.
>

i can't properly respond to this for all the tears of laughter in my eyes.
That's just too funny.

@Matt: i will certainly take your advice and stick with 'checkout' in the
docs, avoiding aliases. i just got home for the night and have tomorrow
off, so look for it by tomorrow at the latest.

-- 
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
___
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] G+ Fossil page?

[Ron Wilson]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Martijn Coppoolse <
li...@martijn.coppoolse.com> wrote:

> On 19-3-2014 18:28, Ron Wilson wrote:
>
>>   There is also freecode.com . Fossil has a listing
>> there, but it is out of date.
>> (http://freecode.com/projects/fossil)
>>
>
> Does anybody know who the maintainer is?
>
> Freecode seems to have an API, and so do Google+ and Facebook. It should
> be feasible to write a script that parses the downloads page for new
> versions, and publish the new version (including "what's new") to those
> pages, no?


Maybe look for updates to download.html in the Fossil RSS feed.
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Matt Welland]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Richard Hipp  wrote:

>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Matt Welland wrote:
>
>> This is good feedback and I think mentioning checkout/co in the top level
>> help is important.
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>>
>> What I teach when doing fossil training is the following:
>>
>> 1. Use "fossil checkout" to move from branch to branch (I try to use
>> "checkout" consistently in the training. "co" is nice but confusing)
>>
>> 2. If you have made changes and wish to commit them on a different branch
>> use "fossil update" to move to that branch and then commit.
>>
>> 3. Using "fossil update" to move from branch to branch is probably fine
>> but I suspect that "fossil checkout" is more rigorous and may be safer.
>>
>
> FWIW, I don't think I have ever used "fossil checkout" to move to a
> different branch or checkout (which is something I do dozens or hundreds of
> times on a typical working day).  I always use "fossil update" (or usually
> just "fossil up").  I don't even remember why I added the "fossil checkout"
> command.
>

I've definitely seen issues with "fossil update" that were solved by doing
"fossil checkout" but because they were solved I've never reported them
assuming that the purpose of "fossil checkout" was in part to do a clean
and safe switch to a different branch. If that is not the case then I'll
try to capture/reproduce the issue(s) next time I run into them.

One case I'm pretty sure of was where a symlink was converted to a
directory or vice-versa. Checkout worked but update failed.


>
>
>>
>> A comment to those who find they seldom branch: I use branching and
>> merging extensively as a tool to organize work and enable flights of fancy
>> and exploration. Obviously it depends highly on the problems you are
>> solving but I suspect that if you aren't branching then either you are
>> working on a relatively linear and straightforward problem or you aren't
>> using fossil to its fullest.
>>
>>
> --
> 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
>
>


-- 
Matt
-=-
90% of the nations wealth is held by 2% of the people. Bummer to be in the
majority...
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Richard Hipp]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Matt Welland  wrote:

> This is good feedback and I think mentioning checkout/co in the top level
> help is important.
>

+1


>
> What I teach when doing fossil training is the following:
>
> 1. Use "fossil checkout" to move from branch to branch (I try to use
> "checkout" consistently in the training. "co" is nice but confusing)
>
> 2. If you have made changes and wish to commit them on a different branch
> use "fossil update" to move to that branch and then commit.
>
> 3. Using "fossil update" to move from branch to branch is probably fine
> but I suspect that "fossil checkout" is more rigorous and may be safer.
>

FWIW, I don't think I have ever used "fossil checkout" to move to a
different branch or checkout (which is something I do dozens or hundreds of
times on a typical working day).  I always use "fossil update" (or usually
just "fossil up").  I don't even remember why I added the "fossil checkout"
command.


>
> A comment to those who find they seldom branch: I use branching and
> merging extensively as a tool to organize work and enable flights of fancy
> and exploration. Obviously it depends highly on the problems you are
> solving but I suspect that if you aren't branching then either you are
> working on a relatively linear and straightforward problem or you aren't
> using fossil to its fullest.
>
>
-- 
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Matt Welland]

This is good feedback and I think mentioning checkout/co in the top level
help is important.

What I teach when doing fossil training is the following:

1. Use "fossil checkout" to move from branch to branch (I try to use
"checkout" consistently in the training. "co" is nice but confusing)

2. If you have made changes and wish to commit them on a different branch
use "fossil update" to move to that branch and then commit.

3. Using "fossil update" to move from branch to branch is probably fine but
I suspect that "fossil checkout" is more rigorous and may be safer.

A comment to those who find they seldom branch: I use branching and merging
extensively as a tool to organize work and enable flights of fancy and
exploration. Obviously it depends highly on the problems you are solving
but I suspect that if you aren't branching then either you are working on a
relatively linear and straightforward problem or you aren't using fossil to
its fullest.


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Stephan Beal  wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Martin S. Weber  wrote:
>
>> Actually, in my mind, when reading Michael's message, I kept thinking:
>> uhm,
>> you got it open, now update ;)
>>
>
> Funnily enough - i've been using Fossil since December 2007 and only this
> week learned that you can generically use 'update' to basically do a
> checkout. i've been using 'co' for switching branches all these years.
>
>
>> (not disputing the need for documentation; this is a report from
>> experience
>>  of what went wrong and this should be fixed)
>
>
> Agreed - i'll see to it tonight.
>
> --
> - stephan beal
> http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
> http://gplus.to/sgbeal
> "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
> those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
>
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>
>


-- 
Matt
-=-
90% of the nations wealth is held by 2% of the people. Bummer to be in the
majority...
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Stephan Beal]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Martin S. Weber  wrote:

> Actually, in my mind, when reading Michael's message, I kept thinking: uhm,
> you got it open, now update ;)
>

Funnily enough - i've been using Fossil since December 2007 and only this
week learned that you can generically use 'update' to basically do a
checkout. i've been using 'co' for switching branches all these years.


> (not disputing the need for documentation; this is a report from experience
>  of what went wrong and this should be fixed)


Agreed - i'll see to it tonight.

-- 
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Martin S. Weber]

On 2014-03-20 12:46:15, Stephan Beal wrote:
> (...)
> # f help
> Usage: f help COMMAND
> Common COMMANDs:  (use "f help -a|--all" for a complete list)
> add changes gdiff   openrss ui
> addremove   clean   helppraise  settingsundo
> all clone   import  pullsqlite3 update
> annotatecommit  infopushstash   version
> bisect  diffinitrebuild status
> blame   export  ls  remote-url  sync
> branch  extras  merge   revert  tag
> cat finfo   mv  rm  timeline
> 
> Weird. i'll fix that tonight unless one of the other devs says there was a
> reason why co/checkout was left out of that list. (In practice, though,
> checkout generally tends to only be used only once for a given local repo
> copy.)

...which is, AFAIUI, the reason why it's not on the short list of help topics.

Actually, in my mind, when reading Michael's message, I kept thinking: uhm,
you got it open, now update ;)
(not disputing the need for documentation; this is a report from experience
 of what went wrong and this should be fixed)

Regards,
-Martin
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Martin Gagnon]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:39:04PM +0100, Michael Weise wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> 
> last week I tried fossil for the first time - I was able to understand
> the basic concepts. Then I created my first helloworld_test repository
> and even migrated an existing git repository to fossil - all that within
> 30 minutes, thanks to great documentation for the first steps.
> 
> I was really impressed by the simplicity and beauty of fossil to that
> point.
> 
> 
> Now I've spent about 1 hour to find out how to check out a branch in
> fossil. This might sound ridiculous, but I'm rather new to version
> control systems and here is what happened:
> 
> I copied the former git repository to the server and cloned it.
> Then I opened it with fossil open. Only one file ".gitignore" showed up
> in my local directory.
> 
> Then I tried the "fossil branch" command.
> 
> $ fossil branch
>   gcc_port
> * trunk
> 
> Ok, all the files are in another branch. But how do I activate it?
> 
> "fossil help branch" tells me it's used to "Run various subcommands to
> manage branches of the open repository", but actually only the command
> "new" and "list" are supported.
> I read the word "management" and expected it to include manipulation
> - but actually the branch command only creates and lists branches.
> 
> Then I thought, there must be some command to checkout the repository.
> "fossil help" lists 43 commands, but not the "checkout" command.
> (I overlooked the hint about the -a, because I expected the "checkout"
> command to be one of the 10 most important commands). So I concluded
> the checkout command must have another name or the mechanism in fossil
> might be different from git. Then I started to search the documentation: > 
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/permutedindex.wiki
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/branching.wiki
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/fiveminutes.wiki
> 
> The branching website mentiones checkouts ... but no command.
> 
> Then I used my favourite search engine to find the mailing list
> archives and *there* I found "fossil co" mentioned as an alias for
> "fossil checkout".
> 
> 
> There might be other users who try out fossil as their first VCS and
> the "fossil checkout" command is mentioned *nowhere* in the
> documentation for beginners. I think it should be *at least*
> 
> * In the quick start guide, section "checking out a local tree"
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki
> 
> * In the list of commands displayed by "fossil help"

Personally, I never use checkout/co command since I work with fossil
(since 2010). I notice very early on the update/up usage that I can
change version using the up command. 


$ fossil help up
Usage: fossil update ?OPTIONS? ?VERSION? ?FILES...?

  

The VERSION argument can be a specific version or tag or branch name.
If the VERSION argument is omitted, then the leaf of the subtree
that begins at the current version is used, if there is only a single
leaf.  VERSION can also be "current" to select the leaf of the current
version or "latest" to select the most recent check-in.

If one or more FILES are listed after the VERSION then only the
named files are candidates to be updated.  If FILES is omitted, all
files in the current checkout are subject to be updated.  Using
a directory name for one of the FILES arguments is the same as
using every subdirectory and file beneath that directory.
  
  



It was pretty natural to me since before to use fossil I was using CVS,
where  "cvs co" ---> "fossil open" and "cvs up" ---> "fossil up".

Regards

-- 
Martin G.
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Michael Weise]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 12:46:15 +0100
Stephan Beal  wrote:

> > * In the quick start guide, section "checking out a local tree"
> > http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki
> 
> 
> That page has the section "checkout out a local tree." There's no need to
> go into branching on the quickstart page. Branching is not a quickstart
> topic.

I see your point, it might not fit here.

Anyway, I think the "checkout" command should be mentioned *somewhere*
in the documentation. And a paragraph labeled "checking out ..." seemed
like a good place to me.

Regards,
Michael
___
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] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Stephan Beal]

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Michael Weise wrote:

> Now I've spent about 1 hour to find out how to check out a branch in
> fossil. This might sound ridiculous, but I'm rather new to version
> control systems and here is what happened:
>

Jumping to the end for a moment:

fossil checkout branchname


> $ fossil branch
>   gcc_port
> * trunk
>

branch is for creating/listing branches.


> Then I thought, there must be some command to checkout the repository.
> "fossil help" lists 43 commands, but not the "checkout" command.

(I overlooked the hint about the -a, because I expected the "checkout"
> command to be one of the 10 most important commands). So I concluded
> the checkout command must have another name or the mechanism in fossil
> might be different from git. Then I started to search the documentation:
>


"co" is an alias for checkout


> The branching website mentiones checkouts ... but no command.
>

This is probably a case of "we thought it was obvious." i can't remember
anyone voicing this much concern about this point before.


> Then I used my favourite search engine to find the mailing list
> archives and *there* I found "fossil co" mentioned as an alias for
> "fossil checkout".
>

"fossil help checkout" says the same thing, but of course that only helps
if you know the "checkout" command.


> There might be other users who try out fossil as their first VCS and
> the "fossil checkout" command is mentioned *nowhere* in the
> documentation for beginners. I think it should be *at least*
>


# f help
Usage: f help COMMAND
Common COMMANDs:  (use "f help -a|--all" for a complete list)
add changes gdiff   openrss ui
addremove   clean   helppraise  settingsundo
all clone   import  pullsqlite3 update
annotatecommit  infopushstash   version
bisect  diffinitrebuild status
blame   export  ls  remote-url  sync
branch  extras  merge   revert  tag
cat finfo   mv  rm  timeline

Weird. i'll fix that tonight unless one of the other devs says there was a
reason why co/checkout was left out of that list. (In practice, though,
checkout generally tends to only be used only once for a given local repo
copy.)



> * In the quick start guide, section "checking out a local tree"
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki


That page has the section "checkout out a local tree." There's no need to
go into branching on the quickstart page. Branching is not a quickstart
topic.


> * In the list of commands displayed by "fossil help"
>

i'll get that added tonight unless someone objects for some reason.

-- 
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

[fossil-users] Please improve documentation for the "checkout" command

[Michael Weise]

Hi Folks,

last week I tried fossil for the first time - I was able to understand
the basic concepts. Then I created my first helloworld_test repository
and even migrated an existing git repository to fossil - all that within
30 minutes, thanks to great documentation for the first steps.

I was really impressed by the simplicity and beauty of fossil to that
point.


Now I've spent about 1 hour to find out how to check out a branch in
fossil. This might sound ridiculous, but I'm rather new to version
control systems and here is what happened:

I copied the former git repository to the server and cloned it.
Then I opened it with fossil open. Only one file ".gitignore" showed up
in my local directory.

Then I tried the "fossil branch" command.

$ fossil branch
  gcc_port
* trunk

Ok, all the files are in another branch. But how do I activate it?

"fossil help branch" tells me it's used to "Run various subcommands to
manage branches of the open repository", but actually only the command
"new" and "list" are supported.
I read the word "management" and expected it to include manipulation
- but actually the branch command only creates and lists branches.

Then I thought, there must be some command to checkout the repository.
"fossil help" lists 43 commands, but not the "checkout" command.
(I overlooked the hint about the -a, because I expected the "checkout"
command to be one of the 10 most important commands). So I concluded
the checkout command must have another name or the mechanism in fossil
might be different from git. Then I started to search the documentation:

http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/permutedindex.wiki
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/branching.wiki
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/fiveminutes.wiki

The branching website mentiones checkouts ... but no command.

Then I used my favourite search engine to find the mailing list
archives and *there* I found "fossil co" mentioned as an alias for
"fossil checkout".


There might be other users who try out fossil as their first VCS and
the "fossil checkout" command is mentioned *nowhere* in the
documentation for beginners. I think it should be *at least*

* In the quick start guide, section "checking out a local tree"
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki

* In the list of commands displayed by "fossil help"


Regards,
Michael
___
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] G+ Fossil page?

[Martijn Coppoolse]

On 19-3-2014 18:28, Ron Wilson wrote:

Does fossil need a G+ page (or FB page, or AOL page, for that
matter) where that type of thing can be posted? i, for one, wouldn't
mind manning a G+ community.


I don't think Fossil *needs* a Google+ page; but it's always an extra 
channel for Fossil users.



(Or is there perhaps one i've missed so far? A cursory search
revealed none.)

There is also freecode.com . Fossil has a listing
there, but it is out of date.
(http://freecode.com/projects/fossil)


Does anybody know who the maintainer is?

Freecode seems to have an API, and so do Google+ and Facebook. It should 
be feasible to write a script that parses the downloads page for new 
versions, and publish the new version (including "what's new") to those 
pages, no?


IMHO, it would be sufficient if such a script were to run once a day.

That could make it easier to avoid forgetting a new release.
--
Martijn Coppoolse
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users