On Thu, 2018-06-14 at 20:36 +0100, Thomas wrote:
> On 2018-06-14 17:47, Roy Keene wrote:
> > If it's any conideration, if it's not a mailing list or something
> > else
> > pushed to me, I'll never see it. A fossil users' forum will never
> > get
> > checked (pulled) by me since I am just too
On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 06:05:33PM -0600, Scott Robison wrote:
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
git branch -D name
Eh, filesystems let you delete files. Unlike most filesystems, git lets
you restore your deleted branches (yes, provided you
On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 05:29:41PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
Okay, more git bashing...
Yeah. It's too easy _not_ to do.
Git is just another steaming Linux-centric pile that makes me so thankful
there are people like Dr. Hipp and you and all the fossil guys.
Consider the following points:
1)
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 02:02:39PM -0400, Ron W wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM, sky5w...@gmail.com wrote:
Can Fossil offer 2 solutions? SQLite based and PostgreSQL(insert big RDB
here)?
I think that the only way this will happen would be to fork Fossil into a
new project. This
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 08:49:14AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
On 9/11/2013 08:36, Michai Ramakers wrote:
For my information: is WinXP still an 'officially supported' platform?
I realise it's a bit old, but I happen to use fossil on that platform,
occasionally.
There are plenty of people still
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 09:08:05AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
On 9/11/2013 08:59, John Long wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 08:49:14AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
Only 7 months left of MS support: http://goo.gl/dtpQj4
So what?
After the EOL date, XP will quickly start bit rotting.
Given my
Sorry for the delay. I've been swamped with work.
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 02:30:10PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 1:58 PM, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv wrote:
Digital signing means I certify that I wrote this. This thing itself, and
not something derived from
Stephan, Andy,
Put briefly: when you tell fossil to give you the contents of file
abcdef, it may internally go through several versions of that file on
its way to generating the one you requested, applying deltas as it goes.
The end result is that the content is logically immutable, and
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 06:40:19PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 6:26 PM, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv wrote:
...that problem is solved by using SHA1. The other issue, which is
specific to
specific situations, is whether the hash alone is sufficient to protect
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:28:00PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 9:03 PM, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv wrote:
My understanding is you already compute checksums on commits.
At a lot of places. Blob content is referenced by its content SHA1, so
any change
I need to go back in the archives and see where I can find an example of
this but in the meantime to ask the obvious, is fossil verifying the
signatures as part of the commit process or does fossil simply carry the
data so the signature can be verified manually?
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 08:32:21PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:07 PM, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv wrote:
I need to go back in the archives and see where I can find an example of
this but in the meantime to ask the obvious, is fossil verifying the
signatures
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 08:43:36PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:39 PM, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv wrote:
If you're working on flagging PGP commits then it would be really nice to
say PGP in red if the signature doesn't verify or green if it does or
something like
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 03:11:34PM +0800, Michael Richter wrote:
On 15 August 2013 21:23, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv wrote:
Hi, is it possible to ignore UNIX executables? I want to do an addr on a
directory tree but I don't know how to tell fossil not to track the
binaries
since
Hi, is it possible to ignore UNIX executables? I want to do an addr on a
directory tree but I don't know how to tell fossil not to track the binaries
since they have no naming pattern. Until now I've been living with it but it
is very annoying and time for me to ask. Help!
Sorry if this appears
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 03:35:08PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv wrote:
Hi, is it possible to ignore UNIX executables? I want to do an addr on a
directory tree but I don't know how to tell fossil not to track the
binaries
since
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 03:17:32PM +0100, David Given wrote:
John Long wrote:
[...]
That's what I have been doing. But it seems very wrong to have to play games
with this.
If you know the names of the binaries in advance, it should be possible
to add each one to the ignore list
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:58:52AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.comwrote:
I guess Richard works mostly on Windows and can ignore *.exe ;-)
IIRC (maybe wrong) he works more on Mac.
I work on Linux. Linux has been my
requested capability. But then again I do about 1% of my development on UNIX
and 99% elsewhere so a lot of things in UNIX seem strange to me and I
probably miss the point a lot.
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:37:22AM -0400, Ron Wilson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:14 AM, John Long codeb...@inbox.lv
I just finished deleting a few dozen repos since I moved a bunch of source
code to another machine and fossil refused to like it. After that I found a
discussion on the mailing lists about test-move-repository. Not a big deal
since this was all test stuff but I would like to know what the official
20 matches
Mail list logo
