Re: [fossil-users] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
On Oct 15, 2013, at 17:34 , Matt Welland wrote: I have done what Ron suggests before and it works well but it is initially complicated to set up. A generic script or tool to do this would be very nice to have available. I created vendor branches, one for each system, the git branch in fossil would track the git master and the fossil branch in git would track fossil. I use rsync to mirror the add/remove/change of files and then script up the commit to capture the comment, time stamp, user etc. of the incoming data. After rsync'ing in the change and committing it the script merges the change to the trunk. It is very complicated but once set up it works great. BTW, I've done this for other systems but never tried it with git. I'm not sure if there are any git related gotchas. One important question: what is wrong with fossil import --git and fossil export --git? Kind regards, Remigiusz Modrzejewski ___ 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] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski l...@maxnet.org.pl wrote: One important question: what is wrong with fossil import --git and fossil export --git? I tried that about a year ago. Fossil's export command lacks an option to specify which branches to export and marking all branches but the to git branch would have caused other problems for me. Was just easier to checkout exactly what I wanted to commit in git in a work area, then commit to git. But, if you want/need all the commits duplicated, then export/import would be worth setting up. ___ 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] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski l...@maxnet.org.plwrote: On Oct 15, 2013, at 17:34 , Matt Welland wrote: I have done what Ron suggests before and it works well but it is initially complicated to set up. A generic script or tool to do this would be very nice to have available. I created vendor branches, one for each system, the git branch in fossil would track the git master and the fossil branch in git would track fossil. I use rsync to mirror the add/remove/change of files and then script up the commit to capture the comment, time stamp, user etc. of the incoming data. After rsync'ing in the change and committing it the script merges the change to the trunk. It is very complicated but once set up it works great. BTW, I've done this for other systems but never tried it with git. I'm not sure if there are any git related gotchas. One important question: what is wrong with fossil import --git and fossil export --git? If incremental import works reliably at both ends then yes, import/export would likely be the best option. The only other reasons why the brute force method might sometimes be better is if you have very large repositories and full import and export generate very large amounts of data or, as Ron says in another message, if you wish to keep only specific branches in sync. Kind regards, Remigiusz Modrzejewski ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- Matt -=- 90% of the nations wealth is held by 2% of the people. Bummer to be in the majority... ___ 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] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 08:34:37 -0700 Matt Welland estifo...@gmail.com wrote: It is very complicated but once set up it works great. BTW, I've done this for other systems but never tried it with git. I'm not sure if there are any git related gotchas. Thanks a lot for your input. Yes, it's complicated setup, but I also wonder whether it's worth to do it, iow. if Fossil's simplicity wouldn't be burnt by using extra brain cycles to take care not to make mistake in, otherwise, very simple workflow when done using only Git or Fossil. Sincerely, Gour -- Those who are on this path are resolute in purpose, and their aim is one. O beloved child of the Kurus, the intelligence of those who are irresolute is many-branched. http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
Hello, I'm very happy with Fossil for internal or private use, but considering that Git is all around, I wonder if there is some safe recipe for incremental updates and/or 2-way sync between Fossil Git for, at least, specific Git branch? Sincerely, Gour -- One must deliver himself with the help of his mind, and not degrade himself. The mind is the friend of the conditioned soul, and his enemy as well. http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 ___ 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] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
2 questions: 1. Do you need to track all the commits from the upstream side? 2. Do you need to push all of your commits? If either one is yes, you could do it, but will be a lot of work. If both are yes, probably best to just use git. Otherwise, you can have 2 transfer work areas that are both Fossil and git work areas. One to receive updates from the main git repo and commit to Fossil, the other to stage your updates and push to git. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Gour g...@atmarama.net wrote: Hello, I'm very happy with Fossil for internal or private use, but considering that Git is all around, I wonder if there is some safe recipe for incremental updates and/or 2-way sync between Fossil Git for, at least, specific Git branch? Sincerely, Gour -- One must deliver himself with the help of his mind, and not degrade himself. The mind is the friend of the conditioned soul, and his enemy as well. http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 ___ 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] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
I have done what Ron suggests before and it works well but it is initially complicated to set up. A generic script or tool to do this would be very nice to have available. I created vendor branches, one for each system, the git branch in fossil would track the git master and the fossil branch in git would track fossil. I use rsync to mirror the add/remove/change of files and then script up the commit to capture the comment, time stamp, user etc. of the incoming data. After rsync'ing in the change and committing it the script merges the change to the trunk. It is very complicated but once set up it works great. BTW, I've done this for other systems but never tried it with git. I'm not sure if there are any git related gotchas. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote: 2 questions: 1. Do you need to track all the commits from the upstream side? 2. Do you need to push all of your commits? If either one is yes, you could do it, but will be a lot of work. If both are yes, probably best to just use git. Otherwise, you can have 2 transfer work areas that are both Fossil and git work areas. One to receive updates from the main git repo and commit to Fossil, the other to stage your updates and push to git. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Gour g...@atmarama.net wrote: Hello, I'm very happy with Fossil for internal or private use, but considering that Git is all around, I wonder if there is some safe recipe for incremental updates and/or 2-way sync between Fossil Git for, at least, specific Git branch? Sincerely, Gour -- One must deliver himself with the help of his mind, and not degrade himself. The mind is the friend of the conditioned soul, and his enemy as well. http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 ___ 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 -- Matt -=- 90% of the nations wealth is held by 2% of the people. Bummer to be in the majority... ___ 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] 2-way sync between Git Fossil
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Gour g...@atmarama.net wrote: On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 10:05:07 -0400 Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote: 2 questions: 1. Do you need to track all the commits from the upstream side? 2. Do you need to push all of your commits? If either one is yes, you could do it, but will be a lot of work. If both are yes, probably best to just use git. Well, it's hard to say... The usual scenario is to track the upstream, apply one's own patches, rebase to master and send pull request (mostly to github, although I like bitbucket as well) which makes it easy for upstream to apply contributions. Otherwise, you can have 2 transfer work areas that are both Fossil and git work areas. One to receive updates from the main git repo and commit to Fossil, the other to stage your updates and push to git. This also seems to be some work. True. The scenario I usually see is that the project admins want to see as few commits as possible for a given change package (that is, bug fix or other change related to a single issue in the project's issue tracking database), so the answer to #2 is likely No, so you'd probably only need to stage 1 push to your personal github repo for each change package (then send a pull request to the project project admins and they will pull it from your github repo). Integrating changes from the project's repo is likely where the most work will be. Depending on how much of the upstream history you want to track in your Fossil repo, it might be easiest to do the integration in the work area that receives the pulls from github, then commit to your Fossil repo, then stage your push to your github repo. (Just saw Matt's message. His setup is definitely worth exploring.) ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
