Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

[Default] On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 07:01:23 +0800, Barry Arthur wrote: > The undo command has a -n | --dry-run option. We could add a sub-option > of 'diff' : > > fossil undo -n diff +1 > I like that it's related to the --dry-run notion, but it breaks with every > other

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

‎This indeed looks the best way to go about it, on second thought. From: Scott Robison Here is the stash version of diff: fossil stash diff ?STASHID? fossil stash gdiff ?STASHID? Why not do it the same way for undo? ___ fossil-users mailing list

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 13 September 2015 at 02:21, Andy Bradford wrote: > Thus said Warren Young on Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:27:36 -0600: > > > Also, it implies that you're asking Fossil to undo changes, modified > > in some way using diffs. > > Fair enough. I only expressed my opinion about

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

Thus said Warren Young on Fri, 11 Sep 2015 18:27:36 -0600: > Also, it implies that you're asking Fossil to undo changes, modified > in some way using diffs. Fair enough. I only expressed my opinion about where I thought it fit, with the intention of avoiding having yet another word or

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sep 11, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Scott Robison wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Steve Stefanovich wrote: > Clever, but awkward in my opinion; the first place to look for such a feature > would be under diff command. At least for me, that is. > > My

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

If I understand things right, this is a diff against the undo buffer, so I suggest this alternative: fossil diff --undo-buffer BR, Johan El 13/9/2015 5:39, "Lonnie Abelbeck" escribió: > > On Sep 11, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Scott Robison > wrote: >

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Scott Robison wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Andy Bradford > wrote: > >> Thus said Richard Hipp on Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:11:30 -0400: >> >> > "fossil diff --versus-undo" maybe??? >> > i don't like

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 01:45:28 +0200, Johan Kuuse wrote: fossil diff -before or fossil diff -before-commit typo... I just wanted to propose another name for the requested option, and actually I meant "call it `diff --before' or `diff --before-update' which I for one would

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 1:10 PM, j. van den hoff wrote: > personally, I find reference to the undo buffer a long way from being > obvious to someone just using fossil as DVCS (rather than someone > interested in in the details/internals of `fossil'). while i can

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 01:10:28PM +0200, j. van den hoff wrote: > On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 01:45:28 +0200, Johan Kuuse wrote: > > >fossil diff -before > > > >or > > > >fossil diff -before-commit > > typo... I just wanted to propose another name for the requested > option, and actually

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

diff --erent or diff --erance Scott Doctor sc...@scottdoctor.com On 9/11/2015 10:27 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: On 9/11/15, Warren Young wrote: diff --undo sounds like you’re asking it to undo the diff, which makes no sense. I agree. I'm just having trouble

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 9/11/15, Warren Young wrote: > > diff --undo sounds like you’re asking it to undo the diff, which makes no > sense. I agree. I'm just having trouble coming up with an alternative. > > How does “fossil diff --last” strike you? Still a little generic, I think, but moving in

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sep 11, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Ron W wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Warren Young wrote: > > Though --from-undo is better in that it tells you what the option does, you > have to know that Fossil has an undo buffer to make sense of it. That’s

[fossil-users] diff after update

Dear list, Is there a way to get a diff between what I had in the disk before executing "fossil update" and after? I'd be happy to read the (fine) manual, but I cannot find the place. Thanks! Yours faithfully, Paolo ___ fossil-users mailing list

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

al Message- From: Richard Hipp Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 8:27 PM To: Fossil SCM user's discussion Subject: Re: [fossil-users] diff after update On 9/11/15, Warren Young <w...@etr-usa.com> wrote: diff --undo sounds like you’re asking it to undo the diff, which makes no sense. I agree.

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 9/11/2015 7:11 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: On 9/11/15, Stephan Beal wrote: On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: I'm not sure "--undo" is the right name for this option. Other suggestions? --from-undo or: --from undo (special-case

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

go back, or > back out the recent changes...") +1 > > -Original Message- > From: Richard Hipp > Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 8:27 PM > To: Fossil SCM user's discussion > Subject: Re: [fossil-users] diff after update > > On 9/11/15, Warren Young <w..

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sep 11, 2015, at 2:33 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > > I guess the other question to ask is how many of us have a project with a > branch named "undo”? Branches don’t enter into it. The proposal was for “diff --undo”, not “diff undo”.

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Warren Young wrote: > > Let me put it a bit differently than before, since I don’t seem to be > getting my point across. When you say “fossil up” and get a whole pile of > changes, your next question is, “What exactly is the content of those >

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 9/11/2015 2:10 PM, Warren Young wrote: On Sep 11, 2015, at 2:33 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: I guess the other question to ask is how many of us have a project with a branch named "undo”? Branches don’t enter into it. The proposal was for “diff --undo”, not “diff

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sep 11, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > > On 9/11/2015 2:10 PM, Warren Young wrote: >> On Sep 11, 2015, at 2:33 PM, Ross Berteig >> wrote: >>> >>> I guess the other question to ask is how many of us have a project >>> with a branch named

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

Thus said Richard Hipp on Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:11:30 -0400: > "fossil diff --versus-undo" maybe??? What if instead of making this a feature of ``fossil diff'' it became a feature of ``fossil undo?'' fossil undo --diff Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400055f36093

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 9/11/15, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> I'm not sure "--undo" is the right name for this option. Other >> suggestions? >> > > --from-undo > or: > --from undo (special-case name) > The code on trunk now

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Warren Young wrote: > On Sep 11, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > Maybe "--from-undo" is slightly better, but not a great deal. > > Though --from-undo is better in that it tells you what the option does, > you have to

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 9/11/15, Paolo Bolzoni wrote: > Dear list, > > Is there a way to get a diff between what I had in the disk before > executing "fossil update" and after? No there isn't. The question hasn't come up before. But now that you mention it, it seems like it might be

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > I'm not sure "--undo" is the right name for this option. Other > suggestions? > --from-undo or: --from undo (special-case name) ? -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

who names branches 'undo' can be perhaps warned in the command help to use the hash instead. S. Original Message From: Andy Bradford Sent: Saturday, 12 September 2015 09:15 To: Richard Hipp Reply To: Fossil SCM user's discussion Cc: Fossil SCM user's discussion Subject: Re: [fossil-users] diff

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

Thus said Steve Stefanovich on Sat, 12 Sep 2015 00:07:54 -: > The person who names branches 'undo' can be perhaps warned in the > command help to use the hash instead. I think Fossil should have as few reserved words in its interfaces as possible. If it must be part of ``fossil

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: > Thus said Richard Hipp on Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:11:30 -0400: > > > "fossil diff --versus-undo" maybe??? > > What if instead of making this a feature of ``fossil diff'' it became a > feature of ``fossil undo?'' > >

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Steve Stefanovich wrote: > Clever, but awkward in my opinion; the first place to look for such a > feature would be under diff command. At least for me, that is. > > My vote is for diff --from|--to undo, where 'undo' is a special tag, same > as

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

fossil diff -before or fossil diff -before-commit ? El 12/9/2015 1:14, "Andy Bradford" escribió: > Thus said Richard Hipp on Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:11:30 -0400: > > > "fossil diff --versus-undo" maybe??? > > What if instead of making this a feature of ``fossil diff''

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sep 11, 2015, at 5:14 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: > > fossil undo --diff While I admire your judo skill, that’s even worse from an exposure of implementation detail standpoint. Also, it implies that you’re asking Fossil to undo changes, modified in some way using

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 9/11/2015 3:28 PM, Warren Young wrote: On Sep 11, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Ross Berteig I personally think that "diff --from undo" is the best of all the proposals floated in this thread, and tend to assume that "undo" is an unlikely branch or tag name. I agree that it is

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On 9/11/2015 7:11 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > "fossil diff --versus-undo" maybe??? Along the same lines, how about: "fossil diff --updated" The semantics being it is a diff of the things you just updated (implicitly with respect to what they were before the update command). -- Shal --

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

Cool, I've often wanted this feature. fossil diff --whatif On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 9/11/15, Stephan Beal wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > >> I'm not sure "--undo"

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 9/11/15, Stephan Beal wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > >> I'm not sure "--undo" is the right name for this option. Other > >> suggestions? >

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

On Sep 11, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > On 9/11/15, Stephan Beal wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> >>> I'm not sure "--undo" is the right name for this option. Other >>> suggestions? >>> >>

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

diff --erence misspelled it Scott Doctor sc...@scottdoctor.com On 9/11/2015 10:38 AM, Scott Doctor wrote: diff --erent or diff --erance Scott Doctor sc...@scottdoctor.com On 9/11/2015 10:27 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: On 9/11/15, Warren Young

Re: [fossil-users] diff after update

diff --before(-update) On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 20:20:53 +0200, Warren Young wrote: On Sep 11, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Ron W wrote: On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Warren Young wrote: Though --from-undo is better in that it tells you what