On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Michai Ramakers
wrote:
> I'm a gmail-user, and for some reason they seem to have cranked up
> their spam-filter settings recently.
> This is one out of a handful of mails (from you, Stephan :-) to the
> list, that ended up in my spam-box in gmail.
>
> Message:
>
I think Andy's suggestion(s) are your best bet but I want to mention what
I've done in the past.
Is your intent to co-mingle same-named branches? I.e. if there is a trunk
in both source repos do you wish to merge both dev streams to a single
trunk? I have done this via brute force in the past and
Thus said Andy Bradford on Thu, 16 Jul 2015 20:56:57 -0600:
> Maybe rather than doing a pull, you could deconstruct both
> repositories, put the extracted artifacts into the same place,
> fabricate a manifest that somehow merges the two timelines with files
> from both trees?
Thus said =?UTF-8?B?Wm9sdMOhbiBLw7Njc2k=?= on Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:27:48 +1000:
> My question is, is it possible to move artefacts from one Fossil
> database to an other?
This is all hypothetical...
It's certainly not in the realm of impossibility. But Fossil wasn't
really designed to
Thus said Sergei Gavrikov on Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:21:55 +0300:
> I also expected that 'fossil amend ' will spawn $EDITOR with an
> original check-in message likes 'fossil commit' does.
That's actually a good idea. The problem with --comment as currently
implemented is that it allows you to re
On Jul 16, 2015 2:31 PM, "Michai Ramakers" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> [ unrelated meta-comment follows ]
>
> On 16 July 2015 at 08:19, Stephan Beal wrote:
> >
> > for bonus points (certainly not necessary), allow multiple -tag/-cancel
> > flags:
> > ...
>
> I'm a gmail-user, and for some reason they s
A question about merging projects:
Given two repositories hosting project A and project B, we want to
merge merge them into a project C. Basically they go into a common
source tree and become sub-projects of the new C project.
One solution is to just build the new source tree and start a new
repo
Hello,
[ unrelated meta-comment follows ]
On 16 July 2015 at 08:19, Stephan Beal wrote:
>
> for bonus points (certainly not necessary), allow multiple -tag/-cancel
> flags:
> ...
I'm a gmail-user, and for some reason they seem to have cranked up
their spam-filter settings recently.
This is one
Thus said Stephan Beal on Thu, 16 Jul 2015 08:19:00 +0200:
> for bonus points (certainly not necessary), allow multiple
> f-tag/-cancel lags:
Yes, I considered that but wasn't certain if others would be interested.
The ci_edit page only allows one I believe so I mirrored that behavio
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Andy Bradford
> wrote:
>
>> That wouldn't be hard to add, especially if there is already a routine
>>
> to check for hexadecimalish. Are there any colors that also are a
>> hexadecimal number?
>>
>
>
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Andy Bradford
wrote:
> Thus said Stephan Beal on Thu, 16 Jul 2015 08:19:00 +0200:
>
> > for bonus points (certainly not necessary), allow multiple
> > f-tag/-cancel lags:
>
> Yes, I considered that but wasn't certain if others would be interested.
> Th
Thus said Michai Ramakers on Thu, 16 Jul 2015 14:56:49 +0200:
> I don't know what the intended behaviour was w.r.t. bogus input on
> commandline - e.g. 'fossil amend tip something_bogus' does nothing
> (and prints nothing).
Definitely would expect an error here, specifically not recogniz
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015, Michai Ramakers wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 16 July 2015 at 07:06, Andy Bradford wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone (other than me) tested the changes for enabling
> > amending checkins from the command line in the check-in-edit branch?
Thanks for CLI support. Mostly I use GUI to fix
Hello,
On 16 July 2015 at 07:06, Andy Bradford wrote:
>
> Has anyone (other than me) tested the changes for enabling amending
> checkins from the command line in the check-in-edit branch?
> ...
FWIW #2, adjusting check-in background colour of tip is pretty much
the only thing I do using the
Hello,
On 16 July 2015 at 07:06, Andy Bradford wrote:
>
> Has anyone (other than me) tested the changes for enabling amending
> checkins from the command line in the check-in-edit branch?
>
> I think it's ready, but it certainly could use additional testing given
> that it also includes
15 matches
Mail list logo
