Re: [fossil-users] Pushing and pulling of ticket reports
On 5/24/16, Marko Käning wrote: > Hi list, > > anyone who knows more about this? > fossil config push ticket fossil config pull ticket > On 14 May 2016, at 12:55 , Marko Käning wrote: > >> It seems like the ticket area - which contains the ticket reports - is not >> pushed/pulled automatically to the parent repository (just like skin >> area)... >> >> What is the reason for that and where are these exceptions actually >> documented? >> Can’t find it anywhere at the moment, but remember to have seen it >> somewhere (for >> the skin area). Perhaps I’ve spotted this only on the mailing list even. > > Greets, > Marko > > ___ > 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] web-UI's timeline should use non-proportional font for commit hashes
Hi,
I just noticed that the Fossil’s web-UI’s timeline uses a proportional font
when rendering the commit messages. These are prefixed by shortened commit
hashes. Although all these have a length of 10 characters, they’ve different
rendered lengths in pixels which lets the timeline appear somewhat rough on
the left. I prefer to see all commit messages nicely left-aligned though...
Thus “a.timelineHistLink” is my friend and I’ve added this to the CSS
section of my skin:
---
a.timelineHistLink {
font-family: courier;
}
---
That makes the timeline look better! ;-)
Greets,
Marko
___
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] Suggestions for list of branches in web-UI
Thanks Baruch, for the clarification so far! My initial point 1) is still open for discussion: > 1) It would be nice, if private branches were marked in /brlist somehow, > preferably > by introducing a new column entitled “Private”, or stg similar. Anyone out there having a comment for that? BTW, I have noticed that there can be more than one private branch (automatically) named “private”… They all appear then under the link ‘private’ in the "branch name” column. Greets, Marko ___ 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] Pushing and pulling of ticket reports
Hi list, anyone who knows more about this? On 14 May 2016, at 12:55 , Marko Käning wrote: > It seems like the ticket area - which contains the ticket reports - is not > pushed/pulled automatically to the parent repository (just like skin area)... > > What is the reason for that and where are these exceptions actually > documented? > Can’t find it anywhere at the moment, but remember to have seen it somewhere > (for > the skin area). Perhaps I’ve spotted this only on the mailing list even. Greets, Marko ___ 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 2.0: rethinking extras, addremove, and clean
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 07:06:18AM -0600, Warren Young wrote: > > On May 22, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Andy Goth wrote: > > I wouldn’t mind seeing all but “extras” go away. You should be able > > to run your build system’s clean command, then run “fossil extras” to > > learn what files your build system still needs to be told about. > > Having to clean the build before finding out what potential new files > exist is extremely unfriendly... > I think Warren is talking about files created by the build system. However, with a properly set up ignore-glob, "fossil extras" will ignore those files (but I don't see a --no-ignore option). ___ 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 2.0: rethinking extras, addremove, and clean
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 07:06:18AM -0600, Warren Young wrote: > On May 22, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Andy Goth wrote: > > > > On 5/22/2016 3:22 PM, Ron W wrote: > >> The build > >> systems "knows" how to clean up files it creates. Any other files not > >> managed by the VCS are the responsibility of the user. > > > > It's also my preference that the build system account for 100% of its > > generated files and know how to clean them up. But I rarely get the > > chance to do the build system or beat it into shape. So I'm happy to > > have a version control system that can also handle the job. > > I wouldn’t mind seeing all but “extras” go away. You should be able > to run your build system’s clean command, then run “fossil extras” to > learn what files your build system still needs to be told about. Having to clean the build before finding out what potential new files exist is extremely unfriendly... Joerg ___ 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 2.0: rethinking extras, addremove, and clean
On May 22, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Andy Goth wrote: > > On 5/22/2016 3:22 PM, Ron W wrote: >> The build >> systems "knows" how to clean up files it creates. Any other files not >> managed by the VCS are the responsibility of the user. > > It's also my preference that the build system account for 100% of its > generated files and know how to clean them up. But I rarely get the > chance to do the build system or beat it into shape. So I'm happy to > have a version control system that can also handle the job. I wouldn’t mind seeing all but “extras” go away. You should be able to run your build system’s clean command, then run “fossil extras” to learn what files your build system still needs to be told about. You should never have to use “fossil clean” in a project repo managed by a properly set-up build system. ___ 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] keep-glob
2016-05-23 23:20 GMT+02:00 Ron W: > To my thinking "keep-glob" and "ignore-glob" are 2 different features with > different symantics. So far, I have not had a need to use keep-glob as I > don't use the "fossil clean" command. > > But, I see that the description for ignore=glob says 'files that the "add", > "addremove", "clean", and "extra" commands will ignore'. So, if everything > in the keep-glob is also in the ignore-glob, what does keep-glob do that > ignore-glob doesn't do? The difference can only be seen in verbose mode (-v). Any file matching keep-glob will result in a warning: KEPT file not removed (due to --keep or "keep-glob") Agreed it's a very thin use-case, thinking about it now ;-) Regards, Jan Nijtmans ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
