On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Brian Smith wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Leo Razoumov wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 14:15, Brian Smith wrote:
> >> For what it's worth, I was working on limited branch syncing awhile
> back.
> >>
> >> I never got around to merging it back into
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Leo Razoumov wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 14:15, Brian Smith wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I was working on limited branch syncing awhile back.
>>
>> I never got around to merging it back into the master fossil repo, but, I
>> think at least your use case is
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 14:15, Brian Smith wrote:
> For what it's worth, I was working on limited branch syncing awhile back.
>
> I never got around to merging it back into the master fossil repo, but, I
> think at least your use case is functional..
>
> http://code.linuxfood.net/pub/repo/fossil-l
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 14:15, Brian Smith wrote:
> For what it's worth, I was working on limited branch syncing awhile back.
>
> I never got around to merging it back into the master fossil repo, but, I
> think at least your use case is functional..
>
> http://code.linuxfood.net/pub/repo/fossil-l
For what it's worth, I was working on limited branch syncing awhile back.
I never got around to merging it back into the master fossil repo, but, I think
at least your use case is functional..
http://code.linuxfood.net/pub/repo/fossil-limsync
I really ought to finish that up and push it into th
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 01:07:30PM -0500, Ron Wilson wrote:
>>
>> Mark your branch private.
>>
>> Anything you want to push can then be merged into a non-private branch.
>
> Ah, well, that's fine for personal work. I meant a bit how t
On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 01:07:30PM -0500, Ron Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 02:34:30PM -0500, Leo Razoumov wrote:
> > Well, even that alone would not be enough. I meant for cases where it is
> > *very
> > important* no
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Leo Razoumov wrote:
>
> IMHO, a very important feature is still missing from fossil -- an
> ability to push or pull a single branch.
> A great variety of workflows could immediately become possible.
Perhaps more useful would be the ability to pull a contributor's t
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 02:34:30PM -0500, Leo Razoumov wrote:
>>
>> IMHO, a very important feature is still missing from fossil -- an
>> ability to push or pull a single branch.
>> A great variety of workflows could immediately become
On Feb 5, 2012, at 20:47 , Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
> But I suspect that there are people using fossil and having a reasonable
> workflow for those cases. I wonder what they use.
A lot of care to only pull towards the derivatives?
Kind regards,
Remigiusz Modrzejewski
__
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 02:34:30PM -0500, Leo Razoumov wrote:
> 2012/2/5 Lluís Batlle i Rossell :
> > Hello,
> >
> > I wonder how people keep code based on a public fossil repository,
> > but without making the derivaiton public. Of course, with the ability to
> > keep
> > all in sync easily, as i
2012/2/5 Lluís Batlle i Rossell :
> Hello,
>
> I wonder how people keep code based on a public fossil repository,
> but without making the derivaiton public. Of course, with the ability to keep
> all in sync easily, as if all was in a single VCS.
>
> There are the private branches... but I wonder i
Hello,
I wonder how people keep code based on a public fossil repository,
but without making the derivaiton public. Of course, with the ability to keep
all in sync easily, as if all was in a single VCS.
There are the private branches... but I wonder if there are other approaches
used by people in
13 matches
Mail list logo
