On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> From what i remember in libfossil, it is possible to go from private to
> public, but never the reverse. Mixing private content with public in a
> commit causes, if i'm understanding the code correctly, the whole
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:32 PM, bch wrote:
> On 1/5/16, Richard Hipp wrote:
> > On 1/5/16, Richard Hipp wrote:
> > Even after rebuilding, the check-in shows up as "unpublished".
> > There's a bug somewhere in the "private" tag handling.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:18 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
>
> i agree with Andy B. that "publish" is not the right command here - that's
> intended for bundles, as i understand it. i've no experience with bundles.
>
The docs suggest it's also applicable to ant private artifacts
Hi Dave.
Don't fret! I'm not attributing this to malice or blaming -you-, but
something does look strange to me (on my local copy of the repo).
Cheers,
-bch
On 1/5/16, David Vines wrote:
> On 05/01/2016 18:53, bch wrote:
>> How did we end up w/ dave.vines'
On 05/01/2016 18:53, bch wrote:
How did we end up w/ dave.vines' completely untagged (no branch)
commits in the repository (or am I misreading what these are?) ?
ref:
/info/b208bf75777604dc
/timeline?u=dave.vines=2016-01-05+10%3A12%3A56=200
If I've messed this up, I do most humbly
On 1/5/16, Richard Hipp wrote:
> On 1/5/16, Richard Hipp wrote:
>> On 1/5/16, David Vines wrote:
>>>
>>> One curious aspect I do see is that the web ui has the annotation of
>>> "unpublished" against the creation of the branch. I did
How did we end up w/ dave.vines' completely untagged (no branch)
commits in the repository (or am I misreading what these are?) ?
ref:
/info/b208bf75777604dc
/timeline?u=dave.vines=2016-01-05+10%3A12%3A56=200
___
fossil-users mailing list
Here's what I see on my *local* machine (see also attached ffox screenshot):
strathcona$ fossil timel
=== 2016-01-05 ===
10:12:56 [d4dc7ad8dc] [c541b6e734] Remove unintended white space
change in wiki.c (user: dave.vines)
08:40:09 [64a5ef28e5] [c541b6e734] Move attachment command from wiki.c
to
I just did another pull, and the branch tags showed up, so @drh, I
think your rebuild helped somewhat. Now to find out how the repo got
into it's "broken" state in the first place.
On 1/5/16, bch wrote:
> On 1/5/16, Richard Hipp wrote:
>> On 1/5/16,
On 1/5/16, David Vines wrote:
>
> One curious aspect I do see is that the web ui has the annotation of
> "unpublished" against the creation of the branch. I did start by have a
> private branch which I then published - I do wonder if this might be
> part of the problem.
On 1/5/16, Richard Hipp wrote:
> On 1/5/16, David Vines wrote:
>>
>> One curious aspect I do see is that the web ui has the annotation of
>> "unpublished" against the creation of the branch. I did start by have a
>> private branch which I then published
On 1/5/16, bch wrote:
> I just did another pull, and the branch tags showed up, so @drh, I
> think your rebuild helped somewhat. Now to find out how the repo got
> into it's "broken" state in the first place.
>
The rebuild didn't help. It was my manual DELETE of the
On 1/5/16, bch wrote:
> What's incorrect, the documentation, or the implementation ?
Both, IIRC. I think you can convert a private branch to public by
cancelling the "private" tag. But I don't think that feature is
completely operational right now.
But it has been over
On 05/01/2016 19:53, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 1/5/16, bch wrote:
What's incorrect, the documentation, or the implementation ?
Both, IIRC. I think you can convert a private branch to public by
cancelling the "private" tag. But I don't think that feature is
completely
What's incorrect, the documentation, or the implementation ?
>From private.wiki:
After additional work, one might desire to publish the changes associated
with a private branch. The usual way to do this is to merge those
changes into a public branch. For example:
fossil update trunk
fossil
Thus said David Vines on Tue, 05 Jan 2016 20:08:40 +:
> And what I read (and was presumably misled by) was the help text on
> fossil publish which says "can be used (for example) to convert a
> private branch into a public branch."
If I'm not mistaken, the ``fossil publish'' command
16 matches
Mail list logo