[fossil-users] fossilize a fossil repository, tsp and other things

My recent experiments with fossil, git and mercurial were so interesting that I thought in these days how to optimize the fossil's repository size. I know that local storage is cheap, but I also think that it could be a good feature for fossil to achieve a very good compression ratio. As the

[fossil-users] Look! A git import tool.

Brian Smith writes: Hi All, I've been playing with fossil for a few weeks now and I've come to quite like it. I was a tad disappointed that a git import tool hadn't been written so, I went ahead and did that. You can find the tool at:

[fossil-users] Look! A git import tool.

pasqualinoferrentino-fos...@yahoo.it writes: Conclusions. The size winner is git, but only with the gc --aggressive command, Well, just after sending this message I thought that I could try another approach, I wanted to find a theoretical low limit of the project size.

Re: [fossil-users] Look! A git import tool.

Brian Smith writes: I notice that the number you give and the number fossil reports don't quite match up. Did the conversion happen correctly? If not would you be willing to share some details about the repository (# of branches, # of tags, # of merges (in particular merges involving

Re: [fossil-users] fossil concepts (a newbie question).

D. Richard Hipp writes: The repository synchronization mechanism of fossil considers the artifacts to be unordered. When you do [fossil sync] (or [fossil Thanks for your time in answering me. You have been very clear. Lino ___ fossil-users