On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 02:20:34PM -0700, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Stephan Beal wrote:
>
> > There is no built-in way to create a remote repository (a fossil server
> > represents the _one_ repository which must already exist before the server
> > can start). You have
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 05:24:06PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:53 PM, lists wrote:
> >
> >> I'm a new user of fossil, having come grudgingly from CVS. Needless to
> >> say, my stubbornness was unfounded
I am trying to get my head around some basic concepts.
One question that pops up: why/when would I close a leaf.
Is this purely for myself to remember I have finished that part of branch or
are there more questions and/or reasons?
Jos
___
fossil-users
(sorry about my other message ending up in another thread, was not meant
that way)
While playing for the first time with Fossil (open, close, delete etc.) I
ended up with the message:
C:\Windows\fossil.exe: no such file: d:/test/source/monkey.txt
C:\Windows\fossil.exe: SQLITE_BUSY: statement abo
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:36:13AM +0200, Jos Groot Lipman wrote:
> fossil open ../monkey.fossil
> fossil add monkey.txt
> del monkey.txt
> echo Y|fossil commit -m "Versie 2010" --tag "v2010" --branch v2010
What do you intend to do with this?
Maybe you should run "fossil rm monkey.txt" after the d
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:49:15PM -0400, Tomek Kott wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> A request for those who are configure / make wizards: could someone provide
> me with a build of fossil from SunOS / sparcv9? Specifically 5.1. I don't
> have ssh access to the server, so I can't compile it myself. At leas
You mean SunOS 5.1? which is Solaris 2.1?
2011/8/12 Tomek Kott :
> Hi folks,
>
> A request for those who are configure / make wizards: could someone provide
> me with a build of fossil from SunOS / sparcv9? Specifically 5.1. I don't
> have ssh access to the server, so I can't compile it myself. At
Sorry, I agree it does not make sense what I trying.
The Fossil message that it cannot find the file is perfect.
Committing is Fossil is transactional so the entire commit should be rolled
back.
So far so good but the SQL-message worries me: "Cannot rollback transaction"
I wonder I the transacti
Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in the
ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, after being asked for
any suggestions on improvements.
I'd particularly like input on how these should be documented, and the names
chosen for settings and com
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Jos Groot Lipman wrote:
> One question that pops up: why/when would I close a leaf.
> Is this purely for myself to remember I have finished that part of branch
> or
> are there more questions and/or reasons?
>
The only reason i've ever done it is to avoid confus
@Alexander,
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:16 AM, Alexander Vladimirov wrote:
> You mean SunOS 5.1? which is Solaris 2.1?
>
>
I honestly don't know if that is Solaris 2.1. I do know it is SunOS 5.1
running on a sparc cpu. It's not my server, and all I know is from a
ColdFusion server variable. I tried
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Alexander Vladimirov
wrote:
> You mean SunOS 5.1? which is Solaris 2.1?
>
Yes, that's 2.1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_(operating_system)
Released in 1992, with an "end of support" date of 1999.
--
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/st
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:23 AM, Jos Groot Lipman wrote:
> Sorry, I agree it does not make sense what I trying.
>
> The Fossil message that it cannot find the file is perfect.
>
> Committing is Fossil is transactional so the entire commit should be rolled
> back.
> So far so good but the SQL-mess
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Tomek Kott wrote:
> Sorry, I wasn't clear. I have cygwin, make gcc, etc. installed, but I don't
> know how to *cross*-compile from my x64 / x86 machines for a sparc / sunOS
> architecture. I'm afraid "tar -xzf ***, cd ***, configure, make" is about
> all I know of
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
> * Versionable settings
>
:)
> * SSL improvements
>
:| (No opinion.)
> * Relative pathname listings
>
:-D (i can't count how often the current behaviour has gotten on my nerves)
> * empty-dirs setting
> ...In an ideal world, I'd add
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Sacha El Masry wrote:
> Whereas I am happy to use ssh to upload to my own central vcs server,
> this becomes non-trivial for
>
> a) general users (non-developers)
>
i would argue that non-developers do not (or should not!) generally set up
new repositories. That
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:47:22AM +0100, Ben Summers wrote:
>
> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in
> the ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, after being asked
> for any suggestions on improvements.
In very short, I favour the merge.
Hahah, thanks all. I had no idea just how old that server was. It's a
university system, so I'm not too surprised. I don't quite understand how
CF9 can run on a machine that old but hey, that's not my issue.
I'm gonna give up on that idea for now, and simply go to a simpler way of
putting my fossi
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Tomek Kott wrote:
> Hahah, thanks all. I had no idea just how old that server was. It's a
> university system, so I'm not too surprised. I don't quite understand how
> CF9 can run on a machine that old but hey, that's not my issue.
>
It MIGHT just compile for you
On 8/12/2011 6:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
> * Versionable settings
+1 This looks like a good way to do this
> * SSL improvements
I have no use for this at the moment myself, but it looks good. I think
it's reasonable to expect people who want to use certs to already have
the tools for it.
> *
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>
> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in
> the ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, after being asked
> for any suggestions on improvements.
>
The fe
On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:46, Joshua Paine wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 6:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>> * Versionable settings
>
> +1 This looks like a good way to do this
Thank you! :-)
>
>> * Relative pathname listings
>
> I would really like to see this on by default. It's the right way, and
> the s
On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:54, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>>
>> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in
>> the ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, aft
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/12/2011 04:04 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
>
> On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:54, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>>>
>>> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably
On 12 Aug 2011, at 16:10, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/12/2011 04:04 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
>>
>> On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:54, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, B
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
> Richard is rightly very conservative about changes to Fossil, and asked it
> was off by default. I understand his reluctance to risk breaking anything,
> however remote the chance.
>
While i sympathize with Richard's position on this as a gen
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:47:22AM +0100, Ben Summers wrote:
> * Versionable settings
OK.
> * SSL improvements
OK
> * Relative pathname listings
Not something I agree with. I think you want to implement the git
behavior? I find that utterly confusing and it doesn't add any real
value. From dea
On Aug 12, 2011, at 12:47 , Ben Summers wrote:
>
> I've added:
>
>
> * Versionable settings
> * SSL improvements
> * Relative pathname listings
> * empty-dirs setting
I'm for the merge in general.
I'd argue that relative pathnames could be turned on by default. It's quite
hard to imagine any
On 8/12/2011 1:09 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>> * Relative pathname listings
>
> Not something I agree with. I think you want to implement the git
> behavior? I find that utterly confusing and it doesn't add any real
> value.
It's tremendously useful for, e.g., my fossil_php_lint script that I
Ben,
Thanks for providing improvements in fossil.
I'd like to share 2 comments:
1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer having all settings in a single text file
with name="value" kind of one-setting-per-line format (although I don't mind a
value spanning multiple lines for readability) rather than o
On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer having all settings in a single
> text file with name="value" kind of one-setting-per-line format
> (although I don't mind a value spanning multiple lines for
> readability) rather than one file per setting.
I thought this
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 01:35:33PM -0400, Joshua Paine wrote:
> It's not hard to turn the new output into what you want, though. E.g.:
>
> fossil extras | grep -v '..'
You are missing an important thing here. "fossil extra" has to traverse
the directory tree, which can be a huge problem. I am tal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
>> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer having all settings in a single
>> text file with name="value" kind of one-setting-per-line format
>> (although I don't mind a val
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
> > On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
> >> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer having all settings in a single
> >> text file with name="va
On 12 Aug 2011, at 20:44, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
> wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
>> > On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
>> >> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer ha
On Aug 12, 2011, at 22:28 , Ben Summers wrote:
>> If it has to be in the file system, I'd prefer one file to many. At the very
>> least, change the name of the directory to something that starts with
>> __FOSSIL__ to make it easier to tweak commands to deal with the names.
>
> More tools hide
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2011, at 20:44, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym <
> ala...@snell-pym.org.uk> wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrot
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> space. But we already have __FOSSIL__, so (in the words of Arlo Guthrie)
> one big pile is better than two little piles.
>
For the benefit of those born after Star Wars:
http://www.arlo.net/resources/lyrics/alices.shtml
http://www.youtube.co
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
>
>> space. But we already have __FOSSIL__, so (in the words of Arlo Guthrie)
>> one big pile is better than two little piles.
>>
>
> For the benefit of those born after Star Wars:
>
> http
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski
wrote:
>
> On Aug 12, 2011, at 22:28 , Ben Summers wrote:
>
> >> If it has to be in the file system, I'd prefer one file to many. At the
> very least, change the name of the directory to something that starts with
> __FOSSIL__ to make it eas
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> You know you can rename _FOSSIL_ as .fos, right?
>
> mv _FOSSIL_ .fos
>
> Should I make .fos the default
>
While i'm all for Unix-style names, i think the name .fos might confuse more
people than it would help, whereas _FOSSIL_ "clearl
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski <
> l...@maxnet.org.pl> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2011, at 22:28 , Ben Summers wrote:
>>
>> >> If it has to be in the file system, I'd prefer one file to many. At the
>> very least,
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 06:42:23PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
> You know you can rename _FOSSIL_ as .fos, right?
>
> mv _FOSSIL_ .fos
>
> Should I make .fos the default?
I think .fos is too random / short. .fossil would be fine as default on
UNIX (if you can figure out how to mark _FOSSIL_
+1
> - Original Message -
> From: Joerg Sonnenberger
> Sent: 08/13/11 05:01 AM
> To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] _FOSSIL_ vs. .fos Was: New features for merging
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 06:42:23PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
> > You know you can rena
44 matches
Mail list logo
