Hello,
A few minor suggestions for the Check-in Names wiki page
(http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/checkin_names.wiki):
* Should it mention that prev is also accepted as a special name?
* I think ckout doesn't work anymore and should be removed from the
list. (See check-in
Od: Edward Berner e...@bernerfam.com
Komu: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Datum: 31.12.2012 08:53
Předmět: Re: [fossil-users] fossil sqlite3
On 12/30/2012 10:43 PM, Michael Richter wrote:
Is there any way to execute SQL statements from the command line using
fossil sqlite3? The docs for
My understanding is that git rebase is used primarily to produce
patches to be applied onto a particular tag or checkin of a
destination repository, to give the same result as currently in the
source repository, but without requiring the destination to do a git
pull from the source repo, or to
On 31 December 2012 15:53, Edward Berner e...@bernerfam.com wrote:
fossil info calls it project-code but it seems to be the same thing
that fossil new and fossil clone call project-id.
Waitwhat? My version of Fossil (This is fossil version 1.25 [558a17a686]
2012-12-22 13:48:31 UTC) doesn't
On 12/31/2012 12:24 AM, Michael Richter wrote:
On 31 December 2012 15:53, Edward Berner e...@bernerfam.com
mailto:e...@bernerfam.com wrote:
fossil info calls it project-code but it seems to be the same
thing that fossil new and fossil clone call project-id.
Waitwhat? My version of
[Sorry to break threading, but I unsubscribed, then saw this in the
archives and re-subscribed just to answer, but I don't have the
Message-ID.]
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 02:05:38PM -0600, Nico Williams wrote:
I repeat: git rebase does not
On 31 December 2012 17:27, Edward Berner e...@bernerfam.com wrote:
Waitwhat? My version of Fossil (This is fossil version 1.25 [558a17a686]
2012-12-22 13:48:31 UTC) doesn't show anything about project-id for
fossil new/clone.
What do you get when you create a test repository? It should, I
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Mike Meyer m...@mired.org wrote:
Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
Go back through those 30 posts you mentioned. Go back to the very
first one from me. I tried to be concise and wrote just three
paragraphs that, IMO, captured what was needed. I
On 31 December 2012 04:41, Mike Meyer m...@mired.org wrote:
Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
Go back through those 30 posts you mentioned. Go back to the very
first one from me. I tried to be concise and wrote just three
paragraphs that, IMO, captured what was needed. I certainly
On 12/31/12 11:17, Nico Williams wrote:
[---]
But I feel I must at least address this
insinuation that I was trolling.
It's obvious that you aren't trolling. You don't have to defend
yourself against such nonsense.
--
Kind regards,
Jan Danielsson
there might have been email overlap. fossil info also spits out the
project-id. That's what Petr was saying I believe.
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 17:51:31 +0800
From: ttmrich...@gmail.com
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] fossil sqlite3
On 31 December 2012 17:27,
On 12/31/2012 06:21 AM, Jan Danielsson wrote:
On 12/31/12 11:17, Nico Williams wrote:
[---]
But I feel I must at least address this
insinuation that I was trolling.
It's obvious that you aren't trolling. You don't have to defend
yourself against such nonsense.
I agree with Jan. I also
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Steve Havelka yo...@q7.com wrote:
On 12/31/2012 06:21 AM, Jan Danielsson wrote:
On 12/31/12 11:17, Nico Williams wrote:
[---]
But I feel I must at least address this
insinuation that I was trolling.
It's obvious that you aren't trolling. You don't have to
I too have been saddened by the two flame wars on this list lately. I have held
onto the list because Fossil is super valuable to me and I want to stay in the
loop.
I can only hope that folks will learn to think before hitting reply in the new
year...
michael at barrow dot me
+1.408.782.4249
On Dec 31, 2012, at 1:29 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
I haven't yet re-unsubscribed. Joerg's note added hope
Thank you for explaining rebase. It's not something I've ever needed to do, so
I was skeptical of its value, and even more skeptical that it would ever be
adopted
On 12/31/12 19:52, Doug Currie wrote:
On Dec 31, 2012, at 1:29 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
I haven't yet re-unsubscribed. Joerg's note added hope
Thank you for explaining rebase. It's not something I've ever needed to do,
so I was skeptical of its value, and even more
I concur, the last month has seen a breakdown in the normally friendly
exchanges.
Might I suggest that we look on tomorrow as a new beginning - after all, we all
survived the end of the Mayan calendar :-)
This is open source software - so no one owes anyone any support.
If you want
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Jan Danielsson
jan.m.daniels...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/31/12 11:17, Nico Williams wrote:
But I feel I must at least address this
insinuation that I was trolling.
It's obvious that you aren't trolling. You don't have to defend
yourself against such nonsense.
Thanks Mike, I appreciate this.
BTW, I now have a pretty good idea of what fossil rebase would look
like; the discussion was a success, largely thanks to Joerg's insight.
I've also started looking at src/merge.c to have an idea of how to
implement a version of fossil merge --cherrypick that
19 matches
Mail list logo
