On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Joe Mistachkin wrote:
>
> By my estimation, there are around 7 branches (nearly?) ready to be merged.
> I've
> briefly looked over the changes; however, it would be good if others could
> review
> and/or provide feedback on them as well.
>
> --
> Joe Mistachkin
>
On 14/03/2016 18:42, David Vines wrote:
Thanks for the feedback - I was thinking that some testcases would
definitely make sense - I'll start on those while we see if there's a
consensus and whether that will require changes to the implementation...
The technote-cli branch can be closed (it
On 3/18/2016 1:20 AM, David Vines wrote:
On 14/03/2016 18:42, David Vines wrote:
Thanks for the feedback - I was thinking that some testcases would
definitely make sense - I'll start on those while we see if there's a
consensus and whether that will require changes to the implementation...
T
On 13/03/2016 23:58, Ross Berteig wrote:
On 3/13/2016 4:24 AM, David Vines wrote:
On 11/03/2016 22:49, Ross Berteig wrote:
* technoteattachcli
New fossil attach command for CLI ability to attach files to wiki pages
and technotes. Work in progress, apparently stalled.
* technote-cli
New C
On 3/13/2016 4:24 AM, David Vines wrote:
On 11/03/2016 22:49, Ross Berteig wrote:
* technoteattachcli
New fossil attach command for CLI ability to attach files to wiki pages
and technotes. Work in progress, apparently stalled.
* technote-cli
New CLI features for managing technotes. Work in
On 3/12/2016 11:45 PM, Baruch Burstein wrote:
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Ross Berteig wrote:
On 3/11/2016 3:40 PM, Joe Mistachkin wrote:
I don't feel strongly about gone or not, but consistent would be
good. IIRC there was some resistance to the original version of thi
On 11/03/2016 22:49, Ross Berteig wrote:
On 3/10/2016 7:52 PM, Joe Mistachkin wrote:
By my estimation, there are around 7 branches (nearly?) ready to be
merged.
[snip]
* technoteattachcli
New fossil attach command for CLI ability to attach files to wiki pages
and technotes. Work in progr
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Stephan Beal
wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Joe Mistachkin
> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > * miniz-1.16br1
>> >
>> > IMHO, if any library we fold in to our source tree has updates, we
>> > should evaluate them. Miniz certainly fits that description, the
>> > qu
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Ross Berteig wrote:
>
>
> On 3/11/2016 3:40 PM, Joe Mistachkin wrote:
>
>>
>> Ross Berteig wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * [ff4a] pending-review
>>>
>>> IMHO, merge this.
>>>
>>> Changes how the fusefs command appears when fossil is compiled without
>>> fusefs included. S
On 3/12/2016 2:10 PM, Joe Mistachkin wrote:
Ross Berteig wrote:
It also led me to blog posts from miniz's author. He does seem to
still be alive, but miniz may be dormant.
Do you have a direct link to the authors blog (I don't think the
"cbloomrants" is it)? Can we get somebody to ping him and
Ross Berteig wrote:
>
> It also led me to blog posts from miniz's author. He does seem to
> still be alive, but miniz may be dormant.
>
Do you have a direct link to the authors blog (I don't think the
"cbloomrants" is it)? Can we get somebody to ping him and see if he's
still interested in main
On 3/12/2016 12:24 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
Someone (Baruch?) posted a link to the now-official github site, but
AFAICS it's not actively maintained. i mailed the guy a couple of times
with C89 portability patches and got no response, but IIRC Baruch
reported getting a response from him.
In any
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Joe Mistachkin
wrote:
> >
> > * miniz-1.16br1
> >
> > IMHO, if any library we fold in to our source tree has updates, we
> > should evaluate them. Miniz certainly fits that description, the
> > question may be where the official upstream source is located post
>
On 3/11/2016 3:40 PM, Joe Mistachkin wrote:
Ross Berteig wrote:
* [ff4a] pending-review
IMHO, merge this.
Changes how the fusefs command appears when fossil is compiled without
fusefs included. Seems reasonable. In fact, I wonder if the json command
shouldn't get a similar treatment when
On 3/11/2016 3:16 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote:
On 11/03/16 23:49, Ross Berteig wrote:
[---]
* jan-manifest-tags
New feature to generate a file containing a list of the tags on the
current checkout for the benefit of build and release tooling, suggested
and mostly implemented by Jan Danielsson:
ht
Ross Berteig wrote:
>
> * stash-fixes
>
> IMHO, not quite ready yet.
>
> The schema change in the stash-related tables clearly fixes one problem
> with mixing a stash with renamed files. I think this needs to hold off
> until someone more expert in SQLite than I figures out how to safely do
>
On 11/03/16 23:49, Ross Berteig wrote:
[---]
> * jan-manifest-tags
>
> New feature to generate a file containing a list of the tags on the
> current checkout for the benefit of build and release tooling, suggested
> and mostly implemented by Jan Danielsson:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-
On 3/10/2016 7:52 PM, Joe Mistachkin wrote:
By my estimation, there are around 7 branches (nearly?) ready to be merged.
I've briefly looked over the changes; however, it would be good if others could
review and/or provide feedback on them as well.
In rough order of age, based on a quick scan
Thus said "Joe Mistachkin" on Thu, 10 Mar 2016 19:52:08 -0800:
> I've briefly looked over the changes; however, it would be good if
> others could review and/or provide feedback on them as well.
After some discussion with Ross, I think there may be some improvements
that could be made in th
By my estimation, there are around 7 branches (nearly?) ready to be merged.
I've
briefly looked over the changes; however, it would be good if others could
review
and/or provide feedback on them as well.
--
Joe Mistachkin
___
fossil-dev mailing list
fo
20 matches
Mail list logo
