Thus said Stephan Beal on Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:45:14 +0100: > IMO it's inherently evil because it promotes checking in untested > subsets. Automated tests require a full, valid tree. Checking in a > part of a change may well lead to code which runs on your machine but > doesn't run on remotes (continuous integration systems or other > users).
The biggest difference being that with git, your commit is not automatically pushed. So it's alright to commit partial changes because they won't go anywhere and remain local until you actually pull and then push (or make a pull request). With Fossil, on the other hand, the default sync mode is autosync which means that committing a partial commit could be much more dangerous than in git. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 40000000550cab48 _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
