On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 03:24:10 +0200, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com
wrote:
As far as I can tell, Fossil offers two ways to allow outsiders to
submit changes to an open source software project:
1. Give them Develop privs
2. Ask them to fossil diff and mail you a patch file
In my
On Wednesday, June 4, 2014, Alysson Gonçalves de Azevedo
agalys...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','agalys...@gmail.com');
wrote:
I started to use fossil just today, but let me participate too :)
Everyday I have a list of tasks that I have to work on and when I finish,
I like to
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:08 PM, Alysson Gonçalves de Azevedo
agalys...@gmail.com wrote:
I started to use fossil just today, but let me participate too :)
Everyday I have a list of tasks that I have to work on and when I finish,
I like to separate the changes of each task by commit.
To do
On 6/5/2014 01:51, j. van den hoff wrote:
what _is_ missing is the GitHub layer
I wish to do without that layer. I like Fossil the way it is: simple to
use, yet powerful. I like being able to host my Fossil repo on my own
server.
Perhaps you're getting hung up on the fact that I
On 5 Jun 2014, at 02:24, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote:
The thing is, a unified diff cannot express all the information Fossil knows:
file moves/renames/deletions, commit comments, the difference between a
changeset and a monolithic patch, the point in the revision history the diff
On 6/5/2014 1:20 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:53 PM, B Harderbrad.har...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, non-propagating tags are also checkout-able items.
What am I missing about bookmarks that we can't already enjoy w/ tags,
outside of new syntax ?
Here's
Lluís Batlle i Rossell vi...@viric.name
writes:
Hello,
I'm trying to add fossil support to the 'go tool', as it supports
other VCSs:
http://golang.org/cmd/go/#hdr-Remote_import_path_syntax
Starting with Golang and wonder if something has changed in between in
regard to ability to provide
On 6/5/2014 04:35, Kevin Martin wrote:
2) Get them to email you the clone
My Fossil DB file is currently only 1.4M, but that's only because I
didn't bother importing the previous 10 years of history into it. If I
had chosen to do that, I expect the file would be bigger than the 10-20
MB
Suppose you had the ability to create a sub-repository - a kind of clone
of a full fossil repo but that only contains a small subset of the
check-ins (and/or wiki and tickets, etc.) A sub-repository would not even
be self-complete: It would only contain artifacts for the file that
changed in the
On 6/5/2014 07:14, Richard Hipp wrote:
Suppose you had the ability to create a sub-repository
That was the idea, yes.
A sub-repository would not
even be self-complete: It would only contain artifacts for the file
that changed in the check-ins that it contains
I expected that limitation as
Thus said Warren Young on Thu, 05 Jun 2014 04:06:09 -0600:
I realize implementing all this will take a fair bit of work. When I
describe it as simple, I mean that I don't see that it changes a lot
about how Fossil works internally.
I wonder if it could start out as an external tool
Thus said Richard Hipp on Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:14:17 -0400:
Suppose you had the ability to create a sub-repository - a kind of
clone of a full fossil repo but that only contains a small subset of
the check-ins (and/or wiki and tickets, etc.) A sub-repository would
not even be
On 6/5/2014 09:18, Andy Bradford wrote:
fossil pull subrepo.fossil -R project.fossil
A contribution from an untrusted outsider needs to be checked carefully
before it is committed to the master repo.
___
fossil-users mailing list
drh Fossil allows you to commit a subset of files (by listing the
files on the fossil commit command line) but there is no mechanism
for committing a subset of lines within a single file.
That, and there _are_ branches/tags which are encouraged to be used...
my prev comment was for the case where
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:36 AM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote:
drh Fossil allows you to commit a subset of files (by listing the
files on the fossil commit command line) but there is no mechanism
for committing a subset of lines within a single file.
That, and there _are_
Thus said Warren Young on Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:25:39 -0600:
A contribution from an untrusted outsider needs to be checked
carefully before it is committed to the master repo.
Certainly.
fossil open subrepo.fossil
# inspect
fossil ui subrepo.fossil
# inspect
I'm not sure how many
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org
wrote:
Thus said Warren Young on Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:25:39 -0600:
A contribution from an untrusted outsider needs to be checked
carefully before it is committed to the master repo.
Certainly.
fossil open
On 6/5/2014 11:54, Richard Hipp wrote:
But maybe there should be an open to the fossil submit or fossil
subrepo command (whatever it ends up being called) so that you can
specify either a dependent or an independent subrepository.
Doesn't the outside developer already have a self-contained
Couldn’t this also be used to solve another problem, that of keeping separate
repos for various projects that depend on (sometimes massive) common library
files? Currently to deal with that I have to put all projects under the same
repo, which is not ideal. The alternative, keeping multiple
On Jun 5, 2014 10:55 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org
wrote:
Thus said Warren Young on Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:25:39 -0600:
A contribution from an untrusted outsider needs to be checked
carefully before
I have been experimenting with Fossil for a few days now and am really
liking it so far. I am in the process of switching all my old SVN
repositories to Fossil and haven't had any trouble.
However, I ran into an issue when creating a new repository today. To
illustrate:
fossil new
Using stash and doing update then commits to appropriate branches along
mostly addresses the need to split out changes from a single editing
session. The one thing it cannot do is easily accommodate a mix of changes
in a single file. That said I think I disagree that this is really needed.
In git
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Matt Welland estifo...@gmail.com wrote:
foo.txt has changes A, B, C and D.
After each change the developer had the foresight to do a fossil stash
snapshot. Now the developer decides to put changes B and D into branch b-d
and keep changes A and C on the trunk:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Matt Welland estifo...@gmail.com wrote:
foo.txt has changes A, B, C and D.
After each change the developer had the foresight to do a fossil stash
snapshot. Now the developer decides
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Matt Welland estifo...@gmail.com wrote:
foo.txt has changes A, B, C and D.
After each change the developer had the
I'm not Nico, but allow me answer that as well.
When I was learning to use git, my teacher told me:
When you have a set of changes where a peace of code requires another
peace, you must commit all that together. But if you have a change that
doesn't have any dependeces, you should commit that
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Alysson Gonçalves de Azevedo
agalys...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not Nico, but allow me answer that as well.
When I was learning to use git, my teacher told me:
When you have a set of changes where a peace of code requires another
peace, you must commit all that
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:38 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2014 10:55 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
If you included all the artifacts that you need, that would immediately
make the subrepo larger than you might expect. Certainly the subrepo would
be smaller
Richard Hipp wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com
mailto:n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Matt Welland estifo...@gmail.com
mailto:estifo...@gmail.com wrote:
foo.txt has changes A, B, C and D.
After each
29 matches
Mail list logo
