Re: [fossil-users] fossil vs git-based arrangements. code review and ticket export

On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: > By 'code review' here I mean a web-based tool that has a formalized state > machine for (a) uploading code deltas (b) filing and fixing defects against > the uploaded code and (c) having the right set of people sign off. Like > Code Col

Re: [fossil-users] commits not seen on 2nd local worktree unless forcing initial commit

2014-07-27 23:45 GMT+02:00 Michai Ramakers: > and thanks for this fix as well - original test works fine here, now. Merged to trunk now. Thanks for your feedback! > I'll continue running this branch here until it's merged (although I > don't make new repos too often). And I'd be interested to do

Re: [fossil-users] commits not seen on 2nd local worktree unless forcing initial commit

On 27 July 2014 22:58, Jan Nijtmans wrote: > 2014-07-22 11:35 GMT+02:00 Michai Ramakers : >> Hello, >> >> while toying around with Andy Bradford's fix/analysis, found something >> else, which seems related to the no-initial-commit feature which is >> recent default in trunk. > > This indeed looks

Re: [fossil-users] 'finfo' missing contents; 'finfo --brief' ok

On 27 July 2014 20:35, Jan Nijtmans wrote: > 2014-07-23 12:37 GMT+02:00 Michai Ramakers: >> Hello, >> >> seems 'fossil finfo' is missing output: > > Fixed here: > thanks for the fix, seems to work fine. Michai

Re: [fossil-users] commits not seen on 2nd local worktree unless forcing initial commit

2014-07-22 11:35 GMT+02:00 Michai Ramakers : > Hello, > > while toying around with Andy Bradford's fix/analysis, found something > else, which seems related to the no-initial-commit feature which is > recent default in trunk. This indeed looks like a newly-found corner-case which doesn't behave as

[fossil-users] Suggestion for cloning

When cloning a repository, if I don't have write privileges, can autosync by default be set to "pullonly" in the clone, to prevent annoying "pull only - not authorized to push"? Maybe this should be the default always, even if I have write permission, in order to prevent accidental pushes? -- ˙uʍ

[fossil-users] New [globalState] TH1 command (globalStateCmd branch)...

I'm seeking feedback on the new [globalState] TH1 command, which is currently available on the globalStateCmd branch. -- Joe Mistachkin ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/lis

Re: [fossil-users] Issue compiling with 16f1076334 and newer revisions

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Jan Nijtmans wrote: > 2014-07-26 5:08 GMT+02:00 Joe Prostko : >> Using the handy `fossil bisect`, I found that this revision is causing >> me problems while compiling Fossil from within Haiku. > > Should be fixed here: >

Re: [fossil-users] Issue compiling with 16f1076334 and newer revisions

2014-07-26 5:08 GMT+02:00 Joe Prostko : > Using the handy `fossil bisect`, I found that this revision is causing > me problems while compiling Fossil from within Haiku. Should be fixed here: Thanks for the report. The real issue was that alt

Re: [fossil-users] 'finfo' missing contents; 'finfo --brief' ok

2014-07-23 12:37 GMT+02:00 Michai Ramakers: > Hello, > > seems 'fossil finfo' is missing output: Fixed here: Thanks for reporting this! Regards, Jan Nijtmans ___ fossil-users mailing list fossi

Re: [fossil-users] fossil vs git-based arrangements. code review and ticket export

> More seriously, you're comparing a small project like Fossil's > with the capabilities of behemoths like Microsoft. > No, I'm really not. drh was making a claim that users will ALWAYS have to convert between two database schemas when exporting tickets from one system to another. He was making

Re: [fossil-users] fossil vs git-based arrangements. code review and ticket export

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Michael Richter wrote: > More seriously, you're comparing a small project like Fossil's with the > capabilities of behemoths like Microsoft. Microsoft can throw as many code > monkeys at something as they'd like, hence the wide variety of exporting > formats (of

Re: [fossil-users] fossil vs git-based arrangements. code review and ticket export

On 27 July 2014 11:04, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: > Fossil *could* support export to JIRA+git in particular, for example, by > providing a tool that (a) exports to JIRA's supported JSON import format, > (b) collects the mapping from the fossil ticket IDs to the JIRA ticket > IDs, then (c) does a git