On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 20:36:50 +0100, Ramon Ribó wrote:
> >There is no rollback, an commit has been done. I >suppose you mean
> >to reverse the commit
>
> I know it is not there. This is exactly the reason for me to write this
> email.
Sorry for being less than clear - I mean that a rollback is n
On 15 Jun 2011, at 16:28, Andres Perera wrote:
i (now) prefer autotools because i spent some time getting
comfortable with m4
Yes, I think failure to understand m4, or failure to realise that it
needs to be understood, is one reason why people end up disliking
autotools.
Eric
On 25 Apr 2011, at 21:08, "Zed A. Shaw" wrote:
> Branches are not leaves. A leaf is unnamed while a branch has a name.
> Branches shouldn't close, but an unnamed leaf that gets merged should
> just go away.
>
I thought that maybe the right question is "why do we care about
leaves?". As far as
On Sat, March 19, 2011 3:01 pm, Ron Wilson wrote:
> Prefixing a command
> with a variable assignment causes the command shell to export that
> variable for the duration of the command
(Amazing how few people seem to know that :-) )
> (unless your version of cron
> uses a limited version of the
On Thu, March 10, 2011 12:38 am, Ron Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Eric wrote:
>> Finally, I don't think there is any way to safely have automatic merging
>> of forks.
>
> This I agree with and never intended to suggest that forks should ever
> be automatically merged.
>
>> And,
ification is something of a myth. There has to be something there
waiting to be pushed. It could be waiting on an event rather than polling,
but then there has to be an event co-ordinator...
Eric
--
Eric Junkermann
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil
On Tue, September 14, 2010 at 7:13 pm, "Nolan Darilek" wrote:
>... I
> understand that the sync protocol currently doesn't support such a
> thing, so I wonder if it might be made to do so in the future, or if
> there may be some other mechanism by which this could be accomplished?
Not, I suspect,
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:10 am,
"Michal Suchanek" wrote:
> On 26 May 2010 19:58, Eric Junkermann wrote:
...
>
>> "what will be committed", since the repository doesn't know, you might
>
> It does as my patch demonstrates.
Not the repository - vfile
> On 25 May 2010 23:38, Eric Junkermann wrote:
>> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:10 pm, "Michal Suchanek"
>>
>> wrote:
>>> On 25 May 2010 19:59, Eric wrote:
>>>>
>> ...
>>>>
>>>> But ckout is only available if the s
y shouldn't it? All I am doing is looking at a work-in-progress. No-one
else is going to see it. When is this going to cause a problem?
Regards,
Eric
--
Eric Junkermann
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
> I have a fossil repo with two branches: trunk and features. My thinking
> was to develop the new features requested on the features branch,
> keeping the trunk branch unchanged unless something happened with the
> application that required an immediate change. Then once some set of
> features wa
On Sat, March 21, 2009 8:02 am, "Michael T. Richter"
wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 19:40 +, Eric wrote:
>
>> I don't think a piece of software has to do
>> everything and I am quite happy to use various tools to build my
>> "everything" around specific software that does a specific task. The
Just wondering, in the light of [8636eef6e2] ("On the taglist and
tagtimeline pages, only show non-propagating tags. Omit the branch tags"),
if anyone has a _real_ use for propagating tags other than to mark
branches - I haven't thought of anything yet.
Regards,
Eric
13 matches
Mail list logo
