On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Ron W <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 7:09 PM, <fossil-users-request@lists. > fossil-scm.org> wrote: >> >> Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 19:09:21 -0500 >> From: Richard Hipp <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] Fossil-NG Bloat? >> >> On 11/22/17, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I'm dubious over making Fossil a client for >> > any other main DVCS out there. >> >> One important reason that many people use Git is because so much OSS >> is hosted on GitHub and everybody wants to be part of the action. If >> developer Alice wants to play in the OSS world, she has to use Git. >> But if Fossil were able to clone, push, and pull from Git >> repositories, that would enable Alice to use Fossil instead, opening >> the door to wider adoption. >> > > But we give up Fossil semantics. And some of git'd semantics will require > extending the Fossil UI. And, if some of the UI ideas suggested would > actually change (instead of extending) the behavior of existing Fossil > commands. At that point, to my thinking, will be easier to use a proper git > client rather than translate git commands to Fossil commands. > > Also, FWIW, it's been years since I last actually used git to "play in the > Github world". The projects I have been contributing to accept patches just > as readily as they accept pull requests, so I can just download a zip file, > update the "vendor branch" in my Fossil repo for the project, make and test > my changes, then make and send a patch. > > (Yes, many project only accept pull requests. Just been a long time since > I've had a reason to contribute beyond a bug report (possibly including a > tiny patch).) > > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > > I agree on that we would give up Fossil semantics.
I use Git on a daily basis at work, while I personally prefer Fossil, which I always use for my own projects. I can only speak for myself, but in the situation given to Alice, I would still be using Git with .git repositories, and Fossil with .fossil repositories. One single reason is my FAQ to my colleagues: "How do I do this in Git?" As I am lucky enough to have helpful colleagues, I sometimes even run some advanced Git commands at work. Imagine the following situation: I would like check the history of my suddenly currupted git repository at work, so 'git log' doesn't work as expected. If I would have been Alice, I would have typed 'fossil timeline' but as I only see weird output, I ask my colleague for help. I bet that even the most helpfule colleague would answer: "Oh, you don't use Git. Sorry, then you are on your own." To me it's similar to the UNIX philosophy - keep it simple. One tool should be really good at one thing, IMHO. Let's compare with the 'sox' audio tool, which tries really hard to handle all kind of existing file formats for audio. Audio file formats are specified, fixed, and do not change over time. In that case I think it is legitimate for a software project to try to be "as universal as possible". But repository formats are not audio formats, they change over time. And what if, in the secret Git or Hg developer camp, someone is trying to do a similar universal VCS container (including Fossil), just to discover that the Fossil repository format has changed? Maybe I am pessimistic about this, but maintaining up-to-date/in-sync new features/formats continously developed in the Git and Hg (and SVN?) community seems not only a daunting task, but also a way of trying to reinventing the wheel. Why spend time on porting Git/Hg features instead of creating new Fossil features? Another doubt I have after reading this thread: Sometimes I literally browse my repository/global settings/checkout DB, may it be of curiosity, forgotten username, or just to learn a bit more of the Fossil DB structure. I think the third-party http://sqlitebrowser.org/ is just great for this task. Will that option get lost with the new repository format? Best Regards, Johan
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
