Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

Thus said Richard Hipp on Thu, 21 Dec 2017 16:46:05 -0500: > Suppose Fossil were enhanced to show an icon beside each check-in that > indicated whether or not the check-in had been signed and whether the > signature had been verified. Regarding such an enhancement, would it involve configuring

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Thus said "dewey.hyl...@gmail.com" on Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:40:36 -0500: > * fossil does serve both a repo file and a directory if these files > are copied to a different local directory. Unless things have changed, it is generally not recommended to run Fossil on a non-local filesystem.

Re: [fossil-users] New skin for trunk fossil

Thanks, and I'll be happy to do it! I've already made sure that all the included code is either from Blitz, which I think should be ok to reuse in this context, or from MIT licensed code. I think the MIT code should be ok to use, since it's the skeleton css framework, which Blitz also uses. The

Re: [fossil-users] New skin for trunk fossil

On 12/21/17, Antoine Chavasse wrote: > I made a new skin... The screen shots look good. Would you be willing to secure clear copyright on all of the code, then sign a contributors agreement (https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/copyright-release.html) so that I

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

On 21 December 2017 at 15:03, Warren Young wrote: > On Dec 21, 2017, at 2:58 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: >> >> 3) Small green lock, like you see in your browser for https >> 2) Unlocked & red >> 1) Locked, but grey > > That’s going to make the red-green

[fossil-users] New skin for trunk fossil

I made a new skin, very loosely based on blitz. Basically, I wanted to make a dark version of it and then went into a crusade against lines and border everywhere. One caveat is that it only works on trunk fossil for now, as it relies on the automatic generating of the html header, and on the new

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

On Dec 21, 2017, at 2:58 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: > > 3) Small green lock, like you see in your browser for https > 2) Unlocked & red > 1) Locked, but grey That’s going to make the red-green color blind unhappy:

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil clone blocks other clones

On 12/21/17, Peter Spjuth wrote: > > The patch below makes it work, Thanks. Checked in on trunk. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil clone blocks other clones

On Dec 21, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Peter Spjuth wrote: > > I noticed that while a clone was going on another could not be done due to > the global config being locked: I’ve seen such problems when I tried “open”ing *.fossil files with one Fossil instance that another was run

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

On 21 December 2017 at 14:16, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 12/21/17, jungle Boogie wrote: >> >> How are the signatures verified? > > Signatures are not verified, at the moment. > > Probably each repository would have a set of trusted public keys. > Then as

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

For what it's worth, I submitted a patch a while back to add S/MIME support to Fossil's signature scheme. I still apply this patch to Fossil when I use it. S/MIME uses PKI and is primarily used for non-repdudiation or encryption in email (every major email client supports it out of the box).

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

Forged should be a skull and crossbones. I would think yellow and red unlocked locks and green locked locks, but definitely with hover text for those of us with faulty color perception. On Dec 21, 2017 3:16 PM, "Richard Hipp" wrote: > On 12/21/17, jungle Boogie

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

On 12/21/17, jungle Boogie wrote: > > How are the signatures verified? Signatures are not verified, at the moment. Probably each repository would have a set of trusted public keys. Then as each check-in is received via push (or during a rebuild) those with signatures

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:58 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: > On 21 December 2017 at 13:46, Richard Hipp wrote: > > Suppose Fossil were enhanced to show an icon beside each check-in that > > indicated whether or not the check-in had been signed and whether

[fossil-users] Fossil clone blocks other clones

Hi, I noticed that while a clone was going on another could not be done due to the global config being locked: fossil: database is locked: {DELETE FROM global_config WHERE name = 'repo:/xxx';} SQLITE_ERROR: statement aborts at 1: [ROLLBACK] cannot rollback - no transaction is active Both clone

Re: [fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

On 21 December 2017 at 13:46, Richard Hipp wrote: > Suppose Fossil were enhanced to show an icon beside each check-in that > indicated whether or not the check-in had been signed and whether the > signature had been verified. Thus, there are three states: (1) > unsigned, (2)

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

This is something I've not thought of - and I think this is how the fossil source itself is propagated to its official mirrors. I don't know why this didn't occur to me, unless it is simply an instance of: "When you are a hammer, everything is a nail." And I've been looking at container-based

[fossil-users] Digital signatures on check-ins. Was: tangent vs. wyoung on recent commti

Suppose Fossil were enhanced to show an icon beside each check-in that indicated whether or not the check-in had been signed and whether the signature had been verified. Thus, there are three states: (1) unsigned, (2) signed but unverified, and (3) signed and verified. What would the three icons

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 21, 2017, at 1:00 PM, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > > That's where the NAS and sshfs came into play. You seem to be trying to use containers and such to provide distributed service, but Fossil already does that: it’s a DVCS. There’s no one telling you it must live in only one place.

Re: [fossil-users] Rebrand Fossil as "Blockchain-VCS"...

The other distributed version control systems are all blockchains too, yes? I find the term "distributed ledger" more interesting, as I store the accounts for my unincorporated server cooperative in GNU ledger format, controlled redundantly in git (for my colleagues) and fossil (for me). This

Re: [fossil-users] Timeline comments ignore all newlines AGAIN...

Big thanks to Zakero for highlighting subtle CSS/html components necessary to achieve my desired Compact view. With the following changes, I now prefer Compact view over Modern. /* CSS */ span.timelineCompactComment { display: block;/*Necessary for margin-top to work.*/

Re: [fossil-users] Rebrand Fossil as "Blockchain-VCS"...

On Dec 21, 2017, at 12:50 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > Will someone with a modicum of marketing-foo please explain to me how > to do this? What would it mean for Fossil’s stock price to triple? :) ___ fossil-users mailing list

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On 12/21/17, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > 1268vfile_scan(, blob_size(), 0, 0, 0); > (gdb) n You need to step into vfile_scan() (using "s" instead of "n") because that is where all the interesting stuff happens. There is a loop inside vfile_scan() that uses

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Ugh, that is bad news. I was interested in the ssh method for ease of use as well as its encrypted communications ... I suppose nfs is another possibility, but I'm not a fan for several reasons. And maybe iscsi, if Here is what I'm currently attempting to accomplish: We have redundant storage

[fossil-users] Rebrand Fossil as "Blockchain-VCS"...

http://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/long-island-iced-tea-corp-to-rebrand-as-long-blockchain-corp-20171221-00468 (HT: slashdot and arstechnica - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/iced-tea-company-stock-triples-after-adding-blockchain-to-name/) Unlike iced tea, Fossil really does have

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

New host: CentOS 7 Running directly on the host, with repositories over sshfs as before: ranch2@10.1.51.120:fossils on /fossils type fuse.sshfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0) I'm not a C dev, so I'm largely unfamiliar with this type of debugging; let me know if I need to handle

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 21, 2017, at 11:40 AM, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > > ranch2@10.1.51.120:fossils on /fossils type fuse.sshfs > (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0) Running SQLite — upon which Fossil is based — over sshfs is a bad idea. The current implementation doesn’t even try to

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Unfortunately, my first stab at this failed: (gdb) break repo_list_page Breakpoint 1 at 0x7ccc0: file ./src/main.c, line 1238. (gdb) run http --repolist /fossils On 12/20/17, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: >> Would someone help me understand what I'm seeing here? I expect

Re: [fossil-users] Cross-link tech notes to commits

On 20 December 2017 at 13:13, jungle Boogie wrote: > Hi All, > > I know a tech note entry in the timeline can be linked to a specific commit. > For example: > http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/timeline?ss=m=200=e=0 > > See the top commit by AG. > > Can a commit message

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 20, 2017, at 10:24 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: > > Thus said Warren Young on Wed, 20 Dec 2017 21:02:01 -0700: > >> Linux containers aren't foolproof when it comes to permission >> isolation. Better to not let Fossil have root privs even inside a >>

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil hack: quickly finding the first checkin via the web UI

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > i sometimes want to find out how old a given 3rd-party repo is, and paging > through the timeline is a tedious way to do it. It can be done more quickly > by drilling down through the /reports (by year, selecting the

[fossil-users] Fossil hack: quickly finding the first checkin via the web UI

i sometimes want to find out how old a given 3rd-party repo is, and paging through the timeline is a tedious way to do it. It can be done more quickly by drilling down through the /reports (by year, selecting the first year, then the first week-of-year). What i didn't know, until today, is that