[fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread Gour
On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 07:54:27 -0400 Richard Hipp wrote: > The goal of Fossil is to require fewer brain-cycles. Fossil isn't > perfect. I'm sure there are things that can be done so that it > requires less effort. But I believe it is better than monotone, bzr, > or hg, and way better than git.

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread Richard Hipp
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Gour wrote: > > Now, I'm curious about some of the items from the TODO list > (http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/wiki?name=To+Do+List) > and their status: > > * Uncommit > > All what I need is simple mechanism to quickly 'fix' some wrong commits > without tinke

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread Richie Adler
Richard Hipp escribió: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Gour > wrote: > > > Now, I'm curious about some of the items from the TODO list > (http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/wiki?name=To+Do+List) > and their status: > > * Uncommit > > All what

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread Mike Meyer
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 09:27:38 -0400 Richard Hipp wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Gour wrote: > > Now, I'm curious about some of the items from the TODO list > > (http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/wiki?name=To+Do+List) > > and their status: > > > > * Uncommit > > All what I need is si

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread Kees Nuyt
[Default] On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 11:45:29 -0300, Richie Adler wrote: > I like Richard's attitude of "Fossil is there to scratch my own itches and > it's doing fine like it is now". +1 > I wouldn't like to have its CLI turned into a > unmanageable monstrosity (at the very least) or to compromise th

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread Michal Suchanek
On 13 October 2012 16:45, Richie Adler wrote: > Richard Hipp escribió: >> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Gour > > wrote: >> >> >> Now, I'm curious about some of the items from the TODO list >> (http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/wiki?name=To+Do+List) >> an

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread sky5walk
Hi, I too, am a very grateful Fossil user. However, I am both teased and puzzled by... "New information is added but old information is never destroyed. (Ignore the whole "shun" mechanism for now...)" I tend to agree with the philosophy of retaining working doodles and tinkerings of code. But, a

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list

2012-10-13 Thread Gour
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 09:27:38 -0400 Richard Hipp wrote: > Deleting content from a repository is scary. A bug in the delete > logic could easily cause loss of information. Indeed. > We put a lot of trust in Fossil at the moment because it is an > append-only database. New information is added b

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list

2012-10-13 Thread Gour
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 11:45:29 -0300 Richie Adler wrote: [...] > That's the generous hypothesis. It's wild speculation. :-( First of all I do not see anything wrong if Fossil adopt some of the good ideas present in DVCS predecessors - e.g. using Sqlite for keeping artifacts (as Monotone). Secon

Re: [fossil-users] status of TODO list (was Re: comparison with Git)

2012-10-13 Thread Gour
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 10:05:00 -0500 Mike Meyer wrote: > Uncommit limited to the last commit, for the 'oops' commits where your > fingers got ahead of your brains, or you realized seconds after making > it that one of the globs included files you didn't commit, and so > on. This is about the only k