On 15 Aug 2011, at 21:42, Matt Welland wrote:
> 2011/8/15 Lluís Batlle i Rossell
>> 3) The file interface offers most version capabilities currently, in fossil.
>> Easier to reach old version, allowing branching, branches of code may need
>> different settings (ignore glob?).
>>
> I have had th
2011/8/15 Lluís Batlle i Rossell
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 02:41:48AM +, altufa...@mail.com wrote:
> > Me too like fossil because of simplicity of one file / less file clutter.
> Why can't versionable settings be treated like a wiki or ticket page and
> versioned inside the repository itself
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Konstantin Khomoutov <
flatw...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 19:16:50 -0700
> Mike Meyer wrote:
>
> [...]
> > If you insist on them being files, then there's not much point in
> > further discussion. And having them in files means you can b
On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 19:16:50 -0700
Mike Meyer wrote:
[...]
> If you insist on them being files, then there's not much point in
> further discussion. And having them in files means you can bring the
> full power of unix to bear on them (which, of course, is why I want
> them *out* of my workspace
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 02:41:48AM +, altufa...@mail.com wrote:
> Me too like fossil because of simplicity of one file / less file clutter. Why
> can't versionable settings be treated like a wiki or ticket page and
> versioned inside the repository itself rather than as a file in work area?
re in timeline!
> - Original Message -
> From: Mike Meyer
> Sent: 08/15/11 07:46 AM
> To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] New features for merging
>
> On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 09:48:09 +0100
> Ben Summers wrote:
> > On 12 Aug 2011, a
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 09:48:09 +0100
Ben Summers wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2011, at 22:39, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
> >> On 12 Aug 2011, at 20:44, Mike Meyer wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
> >> wrote:
> >> >> -BEGIN
On 12 Aug 2011, at 22:39, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
>> On 12 Aug 2011, at 20:44, Mike Meyer wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
>> wrote:
>> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> >> Hash: SHA1
>> >>
>> >> On 08/12/201
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
>
>> space. But we already have __FOSSIL__, so (in the words of Arlo Guthrie)
>> one big pile is better than two little piles.
>>
>
> For the benefit of those born after Star Wars:
>
> http
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> space. But we already have __FOSSIL__, so (in the words of Arlo Guthrie)
> one big pile is better than two little piles.
>
For the benefit of those born after Star Wars:
http://www.arlo.net/resources/lyrics/alices.shtml
http://www.youtube.co
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2011, at 20:44, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym <
> ala...@snell-pym.org.uk> wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrot
On Aug 12, 2011, at 22:28 , Ben Summers wrote:
>> If it has to be in the file system, I'd prefer one file to many. At the very
>> least, change the name of the directory to something that starts with
>> __FOSSIL__ to make it easier to tweak commands to deal with the names.
>
> More tools hide
On 12 Aug 2011, at 20:44, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
> wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
>> > On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
>> >> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer ha
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Alaric Snell-Pym
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
> > On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
> >> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer having all settings in a single
> >> text file with name="va
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/12/2011 07:10 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
>> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer having all settings in a single
>> text file with name="value" kind of one-setting-per-line format
>> (although I don't mind a val
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 01:35:33PM -0400, Joshua Paine wrote:
> It's not hard to turn the new output into what you want, though. E.g.:
>
> fossil extras | grep -v '..'
You are missing an important thing here. "fossil extra" has to traverse
the directory tree, which can be a huge problem. I am tal
On 8/12/2011 1:50 PM, altufaltu wrote:
> 1. Versioned settings: I'd prefer having all settings in a single
> text file with name="value" kind of one-setting-per-line format
> (although I don't mind a value spanning multiple lines for
> readability) rather than one file per setting.
I thought this
local.file
sub/file.name
... also for other commands like rm, add, etc.
- Altu
> - Original Message -
> From: Ben Summers
> Sent: 08/12/11 04:17 PM
> To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Subject: [fossil-users] New features for merging
>
> Richard has kindly i
On 8/12/2011 1:09 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>> * Relative pathname listings
>
> Not something I agree with. I think you want to implement the git
> behavior? I find that utterly confusing and it doesn't add any real
> value.
It's tremendously useful for, e.g., my fossil_php_lint script that I
On Aug 12, 2011, at 12:47 , Ben Summers wrote:
>
> I've added:
>
>
> * Versionable settings
> * SSL improvements
> * Relative pathname listings
> * empty-dirs setting
I'm for the merge in general.
I'd argue that relative pathnames could be turned on by default. It's quite
hard to imagine any
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:47:22AM +0100, Ben Summers wrote:
> * Versionable settings
OK.
> * SSL improvements
OK
> * Relative pathname listings
Not something I agree with. I think you want to implement the git
behavior? I find that utterly confusing and it doesn't add any real
value. From dea
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
> Richard is rightly very conservative about changes to Fossil, and asked it
> was off by default. I understand his reluctance to risk breaking anything,
> however remote the chance.
>
While i sympathize with Richard's position on this as a gen
On 12 Aug 2011, at 16:10, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/12/2011 04:04 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
>>
>> On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:54, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/12/2011 04:04 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
>
> On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:54, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>>>
>>> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably
On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:54, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>>
>> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in
>> the ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, aft
On 12 Aug 2011, at 15:46, Joshua Paine wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 6:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>> * Versionable settings
>
> +1 This looks like a good way to do this
Thank you! :-)
>
>> * Relative pathname listings
>
> I would really like to see this on by default. It's the right way, and
> the s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/12/2011 11:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
>
> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in
> the ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, after being asked
> for any suggestions on improvements.
>
The fe
On 8/12/2011 6:47 AM, Ben Summers wrote:
> * Versionable settings
+1 This looks like a good way to do this
> * SSL improvements
I have no use for this at the moment myself, but it looks good. I think
it's reasonable to expect people who want to use certs to already have
the tools for it.
> *
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:47:22AM +0100, Ben Summers wrote:
>
> Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in
> the ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, after being asked
> for any suggestions on improvements.
In very short, I favour the merge.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Ben Summers wrote:
> * Versionable settings
>
:)
> * SSL improvements
>
:| (No opinion.)
> * Relative pathname listings
>
:-D (i can't count how often the current behaviour has gotten on my nerves)
> * empty-dirs setting
> ...In an ideal world, I'd add
Richard has kindly indicated he is probably willing to merge the changes in the
ben-testing branch if the community has no objections, after being asked for
any suggestions on improvements.
I'd particularly like input on how these should be documented, and the names
chosen for settings and com
31 matches
Mail list logo
