Hi, >« You say that like you think I hold some kind of official title. I’m just >another Fossil user, like you »OKAs I stated, the Fossil Team does not use >marketing as they should.However you could be one day a good Community Manager >for Fossil. :-)
>« I think one should use Fossil on its own terms, not try to treat it like >Git, yes » [etc.] At least we agree on something... at last. :-D >« Branches in Fossil are just auto-propagating tags » This is what they've said, technically at least. For me this is not how I want it to be, because for most people tags are not branches (Marketing again). In another word, why am I using branches when as I've said tags suffice ? Hmm ? >« your typical Fossil server simply doesn’t have all that much concurrency >going on.» That is why I used to say that Git is better for big projects. >« If you feel I’m wrong, go port Fossil to Oracle or whatever, and then we’ll >see if it’s gotten faster. I think it’ll get slower, but you go and prove me >wrong » Oracle no. Another one will go faster if it is in a cluster. >Server loads that I've talked about... Server loads will be higher if there are too many access (too many people too many changes at the same time for example): and Fossil is a web server. However, as I said, Fossil is not widely used and to be clear I don't think that many access would occur because team are not that big when it comes to Fossil. Fossil is a niche nothing else. I would like it to be more than that but my great expectations are not for tomorrow. I can admit that it [concurrency and so on] is not such a big issue, but then this means that I was right when I've said that git is better because too many access is not a big deal for git. :-D >« My largest Fossil repo is currently running at a 39:1 compression ratio » Hmm.. It's seems good. When I've said that it may create too much information I mean that it takes too much resources (size, access, etc.). However, I've got here a fossil file that is 6.8M in size when the git tar.gz one is 7.1M. I want to point out that the git file is a clone of the original git repository so everything is there ! >« Who did say that? » a) People said that poll is not needed, in another word we don't need marketing at all... b) I won't ask for marketing [approach] if the Fossil Team is a marketing user.c) if you don't know about marketing it is the same as if you say no. >« What *I* said is that answering user questions, triaging feature requests, >and improving the Fossil feature set is not “marketing.” » a) ... that is why I've said that Fossil don't know what marketing is, and neither you do. b) Answering [...] feature set IS marketing, to be clear it IS communication. Communication IS a set/portion/part of marketing. Send bad communication and then you lose customers. It's very hard to earn customers and I pretend that it is better to try to keep them, which is a marketing strategy. Didn't I ask for "another approach, for example a marketing approach" ? Hmm ? Sorry if I hurt : I've said that Truth is better. (I try not to hurt when I could but obviously it is not time for lies, at least not here [at home]) I encourage you to speak to other people as usual. That is what I do expect. Best Regards K. De : Warren Young *snip*
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users