Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Michai Ramakers
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Michai Ramakers
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Sergei Gavrikov
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Andy Bradford
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Stephan Beal
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Stephan Beal
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? >> > >

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Andy Bradford
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Michai Ramakers
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

[fossil-users] Merging repositories

2015-07-16 Thread Zoltán Kócsi
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread jungle Boogie
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Andy Bradford
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

Re: [fossil-users] Merging repositories

2015-07-16 Thread Andy Bradford
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

Re: [fossil-users] Merging repositories

2015-07-16 Thread Andy Bradford
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?

Re: [fossil-users] Merging repositories

2015-07-16 Thread Matt Welland
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

Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?

2015-07-16 Thread Stephan Beal
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: >