Re: [fossil-users] Additional information in Check-in Checklist

[Chad Clabaugh]

This is quite helpful. Thank you. I've subscribed to the dev list.

I do think it could be helpful for others in the future if this info were
mentioned somewhere in the contribution wiki.

Thanks again,
Chad

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Baruch Burstein 
wrote:

>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Chad Clabaugh 
> wrote:
>
>> As a relatively new contributor to Fossil I am uncertain what the process
>> is, and what to expect, after pushing changes to Fossil
>
>
> I can share my experience as from contributing in the past if it helps you.
>
> First off - subscribe to the fossil-dev list. This post should probably go
> there.
>
> Anything non-trivial (i.e. anything other than a typo correction or
> comment etc.) should go in a branch. Name it something sensible, or if you
> are unsure, just name it "chads" or something. It is generally a good idea
> to share what you are working on with the mailing list. Sometimes someone
> will be able to point you to a previous effort to do something similar.
> Unless you are working on a major feature or have questions along the way,
> you're branch will usually be pretty much ignored (in the good sense - fell
> free to do whatever you want there) until you feel it is ready for testing.
> When it is, post on the ML describing what it does and the state it is in,
> asking for it to be tested/merged. One of the fossil Powers-That-Be will
> look at it and comment on it / merge it, usually within a day or so.
>
> Those old abandoned branches you see are likely someone started a feature
> and abandoned it for whatever reason. Fossil as a rule does not allow
> removing these started branches ("History is immutable"), and they don't
> bother anyone.
>
> My experience was that, as a new programmer who was looking for something
> to contribute too, the fossil dev community was very nice and easy to work
> with, which made entry a lot easier.
>
> Baruch
>
>
> --
> ˙uʍop-ǝpısdn sı ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ 'sıɥʇ pɐǝɹ uɐɔ noʎ ɟı
>
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>
>
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] problems with links in embedded documents

[Michal Suchanek]

On 23 November 2015 at 22:59, Ron W  wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Richard Hipp  wrote:
>>
>> That's all well and good, but Joerg is right - it would be convenient
>> to be able to specify the root of the repository in a hyperlink.  I've
>> pondered making that possible with some bit of magic like
>> "[$ROOT/wcontent]" or "".  But it seems
>> hackish.
>
>
> Why not use the  tag in the generated HTML?
>

Last time I tried using  it did not work out very well. Do you
have some idea what is browser support for this tag like? Especially
restricted and terminal-based browsers might be interesting.

More importantly, you might not know what the base is if you are
behind CGI. And the base might become invalid when you save the
generated HTML.

The most reliable thing would be to automagically generate enough ../
so the link points to the root of the repo, and the fossil service
knows what URL it was called by so it can generate those ../ just
fine. Anything else is asking for trouble imho.

This was my major grief with fossil web as well so I gave up on using
it since cross-linking between wiki and source becomes pretty much
impossible.

Thanks

Michal
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] Additional information in Check-in Checklist

[Baruch Burstein]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Chad Clabaugh 
wrote:

> As a relatively new contributor to Fossil I am uncertain what the process
> is, and what to expect, after pushing changes to Fossil


I can share my experience as from contributing in the past if it helps you.

First off - subscribe to the fossil-dev list. This post should probably go
there.

Anything non-trivial (i.e. anything other than a typo correction or comment
etc.) should go in a branch. Name it something sensible, or if you are
unsure, just name it "chads" or something. It is generally a good idea to
share what you are working on with the mailing list. Sometimes someone will
be able to point you to a previous effort to do something similar. Unless
you are working on a major feature or have questions along the way, you're
branch will usually be pretty much ignored (in the good sense - fell free
to do whatever you want there) until you feel it is ready for testing. When
it is, post on the ML describing what it does and the state it is in,
asking for it to be tested/merged. One of the fossil Powers-That-Be will
look at it and comment on it / merge it, usually within a day or so.

Those old abandoned branches you see are likely someone started a feature
and abandoned it for whatever reason. Fossil as a rule does not allow
removing these started branches ("History is immutable"), and they don't
bother anyone.

My experience was that, as a new programmer who was looking for something
to contribute too, the fossil dev community was very nice and easy to work
with, which made entry a lot easier.

Baruch


-- 
˙uʍop-ǝpısdn sı ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ 'sıɥʇ pɐǝɹ uɐɔ noʎ ɟı
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users