Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Warren Young
On Mar 18, 2015, at 5:08 PM, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: HOME=. ./fossil command Here’s a thought: Someone on this list gave me the idea of aliasing “fossil” to “f”. I do it with a symlink instead of a shell alias so that it works even in places like a Vim :! command. If you

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Actually they do allow (and sometimes encourage) you to connect over ssh, and they have bash with history... but the file is written inside a directory called $HOME/data (which is writeable). Openshift is a nice service. I've used it for some time now, no issues whatsoever, but (there is always a

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Kees Nuyt
[Default] On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 19:22:14 -0430, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Having said these things, I must confess that in my mind, I find the staging area a difference that's not easily solved. Perhaps some of you have thought about this before, and have ideas on how to simulate

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Actually they do allow (and sometimes encourage) you to connect over ssh, and they have bash with history... but the file is written inside a directory called $HOME/data (which is writeable). In your .bashrc script (wherever that is) can you

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Yes indeed, and that's something new for me. It was documented just a few weeks ago. Thanks a lot! Looks cleaner that way. So someone was in my same situation, or is there another useful reason for having that var? I remembered that change

Re: [fossil-users] fossil server for timeline will return empty result for some parameters max

2015-03-19 Thread die.drachen
I wasn't sure if my attachment made it through the mailing list. Is there an issue/report/task created for this which I can continue following instead of through the mailing list? I couldn't figure out how to create an issue on the fossil-scm site. On Mar 18, 2015, at 10:30 AM, die.drachen

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Yes indeed, and that's something new for me. It was documented just a few weeks ago. Thanks a lot! Looks cleaner that way. So someone was in my same situation, or is there another useful reason for having that var? On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Scott Robison
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On 3/19/15, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com wrote: I can't answer for Abilio, but given my recent increased experience with git due to workplace changes: the git folk seem to prefer the staging area because

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Here’s a thought: Someone on this list gave me the idea of aliasing “fossil” to “f”. I do it with a symlink instead of a shell alias so that it works even in places like a Vim :! command. Yeah, After writing yesterday's email, I worked another half hour, and ended up frustrated, so I did

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Stephan Beal
Presumably they don't expect users to use the shell, as the shell history is also (normally) saved in the home dir (except in some ultra-pedantic setups where the history is stored in a place where the user cannot access/edit it). - stephan Sent from a mobile device, possibly from bed. Please

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Scott Robison
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Most of the friends I've shown fossil to love the idea of having SCM, wiki and tickets in the same, tiny place. Looks promising for them... but then they miss the

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com wrote: I can't answer for Abilio, but given my recent increased experience with git due to workplace changes: the git folk seem to prefer the staging area because you're less likely to accidentally commit something you didn't mean to.

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Ron W
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: But you're right, now that I think about it, is the only time I've ever seen a home directory not owned by the corresponding user but by root. Does the hosting service provide special commands for creating directories

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Warren Young
On Mar 19, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: I actually didn't know about the ALL command. That changes the things. I believe I've gone over it every time I run fossil help, but never stopped to learn more about it, so thanks for opening my eyes. Yeah, “fossil all

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Not that I'm aware of. I did some googling, and only found upset people, but no justification, nor any kind of special commands. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Ron W ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: But you're right, now

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Scott Robison
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: I remembered that change as having occurred years and years ago. But upon consulting the timeline, I see that Joe put it in two months ago. I don't recall the exact reason. Thanks Joe! This solves an annoyance for me. --

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Most of the friends I've shown fossil to love the idea of having SCM, wiki and tickets in the same, tiny place. Looks promising for them... but then they miss the git staging area. Fossil does give you the ability to do a partial commit

[fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
This email has two motivations. First: Through the years I've evangelized about several subjects. Most of them go hand in hand with my philosophy that​ software tools (well, this is applicable to everything in life) should be as simple as possible for the task they are intended to be used.

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
I was cooking dinner, so Scott wrote it first. Basically I agree with his point of view. I must confess that historically, I first used fossil, then git, so staging was actually weird for me at the beginning. Then I kinda liked it for no apparent reason. It felt like it simplified the partial

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Andreas Kupries
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Most of the friends I've shown fossil to love the idea of having SCM, wiki and tickets in the same, tiny place. Looks promising for them... but then they miss the git

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread bch
On 3/19/15, Andreas Kupries andre...@activestate.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Most of the friends I've shown fossil to love the idea of having SCM, wiki and tickets in the same, tiny

[fossil-users] same port in use by concurrent fossil instances

2015-03-19 Thread Tontyna
Starting several fossil servers with ui increments port from 8080 onwards. Starting several fossil servers with server increments port ditto. Mixing ui and server instances results in double-bound ports. Don't know whether that's a Windows-only issue. Example: When running `fossil server REPO_A`

[fossil-users] Got Ubuntu PPA for fossil-releases up and running

2015-03-19 Thread Oliver Friedrich
I hope you don't mind that I got up an Ubuntu PPA for current fossil releases. This was merely a testing thing for me, to build learn how to handle a personal package archive - addiotionally it nagged me, that the currently shipped version of fossil in ubuntu is failry outdated. This PPA uses

Re: [fossil-users] Got Ubuntu PPA for fossil-releases up and running

2015-03-19 Thread Vikrant Chaudhary
Nice! Btw where can I see the build script that is fed to Launchpad's automated build services? Cheers. - Vikrant On 19 March 2015 at 17:01, Oliver Friedrich redtalonof+mailingl...@gmail.com wrote: I hope you don't mind that I got up an Ubuntu PPA for current fossil releases. This was merely

Re: [fossil-users] Got Ubuntu PPA for fossil-releases up and running

2015-03-19 Thread Oliver Friedrich
These scripts are called recipes. I checked it in into my second branch that keeps the packaging information. The recipes that are actually used are only in launchpad and not stored in the repository itself, anyway, you can look at it here:

Re: [fossil-users] same port in use by concurrent fossil instances

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Tontyna tont...@ultrareal.de wrote: Starting several fossil servers with ui increments port from 8080 onwards. Starting several fossil servers with server increments port ditto. Mixing ui and server instances results in double-bound ports. Don't know whether that's a Windows-only

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
By doing git commit -a, your doing an implicit git add -A before the commit, which stages all the uncommitted changes, and then you're working close to what you would in fossil. But we're talking about the Linus dream: You do some changes, then you select the files (not it seems that even line

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Abilio Marques on Thu, 19 Mar 2015 21:25:05 -0430: By doing git commit -a, your doing an implicit git add -A before the commit, which stages all the uncommitted changes, and then you're working close to what you would in fossil. I see, this is totally foreign to how I use

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Really? didn't know that... I'm impressed by that. There've been times when I've needed it, then proceeded to stash, then stash apply, then modified, then committed, then stash popped and so on... Unless you mean that you do a git add, the modify the same file, and commit as is, without doing git

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Abilio Marques on Thu, 19 Mar 2015 19:22:14 -0430: Having said these things, I must confess that in my mind, I find the staging area a difference that's not easily solved. Perhaps some of you have thought about this before, and have ideas on how to simulate it in a clean way.

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
I think I missed you here, or you missed me, but I know you got the fact that by doing: git commit -a or git commit filename, you're skipping the staging area. For example, by doing git commit -a -m this is a test, what git is internally doing is the equivalent to: git add -A git commit -m this

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
will only commit changes in 1, and if you do git status, will tell you about the modifications done in 3. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: Further questions about staging area: If I do this: (1) Edit file xyzzy.txt (2) git add xyzzy.txt

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 06:22:52PM -0600, Scott Robison wrote: I can't answer for Abilio, but given my recent increased experience with git due to workplace changes: the git folk seem to prefer the staging area because you're less likely to accidentally commit something you didn't mean to.

[fossil-users] multiple independent check-outs against the same repository

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
After reading Mr. Hipp answer to some previous email about git saying: So the staging area is being used as a way of working around the fact that Git does not allow multiple independent check-outs against the same repository? Am I understanding that correctly? I started to think: what does it

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread die.drachen
I'm brand new to fossil but have used git some and mercurial even longer. When I'm working on a project I tend to poke around in the areas of code nearby to what my task directly involves - as a manner of investigating and learning. The git staging area is useful to my workflow because I am

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
Further questions about staging area: If I do this: (1) Edit file xyzzy.txt (2) git add xyzzy.txt (3) More edits to xyzzy.txt (4) git commit Then does only the first set of edits to xyzzy.txt get committed, or do both edits (1) and (3) get committed? -- D. Richard Hipp

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread die.drachen
Further questions about staging area: If I do this: (1) Edit file xyzzy.txt (2) git add xyzzy.txt (3) More edits to xyzzy.txt (4) git commit Then does only the first set of edits to xyzzy.txt get committed, or do both edits (1) and (3) get committed? Only

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Do you follow the traditional?: (1) modify a file or files (2) add the files (every single time... this sucks sometimes, as Joerg said) (3) commit If the answer is yes, you're using the staging area... Cool things about that... yes, you can select what to include (seems that line by line). See

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Yes, I realized you seem to be right and nobody told me (I learnt git on my own), but in git, you can run git add --interactive (and it allows you to selectively work with each uncommitted add you did) and there is also git add --edit, which allows you to directly edit the unified patch in your

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Warren Young
On Mar 19, 2015, at 5:52 PM, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: I've toyed with the idea of writing a shim so fossil can be used in place of git or subversion. I speak only pidgin Git, so I wouldn’t like to speculate about how difficult such a shim would be to write. I can, however,

Re: [fossil-users] multiple independent check-outs against the same repository

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: After reading Mr. Hipp answer to some previous email about git saying: So the staging area is being used as a way of working around the fact that Git does not allow multiple independent check-outs against the same repository? Am I

Re: [fossil-users] multiple independent check-outs against the same repository

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: PS: after running my quick test in fossil 1.31, I ended with two separate artifacts, both on trunk, but without a common ancestor. I'm running Ubuntu, and I haven't compiled the 1.32. I believe that version was released as a patch for this

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Reimer Behrends
die.drachen wrote: The git staging area is useful to my workflow because I am often making changes and testing something, but later decide to have separate commits within all the changes. This helps preserve a nicer history where commits usually have single-responsibility. For example,

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Reimer Behrends
Abilio Marques wrote: Cool things about that... yes, you can select what to include (seems that line by line). This does not require a staging area. Darcs, for example, had such selective commits since its inception (in fact, it was and is the default mode of operation for Darcs, for better

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Andreas Kupries
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: Really? didn't know that... I'm impressed by that. There've been times when I've needed it, then proceeded to stash, then stash apply, then modified, then committed, then stash popped and so on... Unless you mean that

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Abilio Marques on Thu, 19 Mar 2015 22:10:41 -0430: git commit -a or git commit filename, you're skipping the staging area. Yes, that's right---thanks to your explanation. I haven't needed it and now that I understand it (at least according what has been discussed) I'm

Re: [fossil-users] multiple independent check-outs against the same repository

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
I imagined some of those scenarios right away after my experiment... Some are great... Until today, I was doing a fossil clone file:// or ssh:// ... Now I can deal with just a single copy of the repo. I only see it quickly and indirectly mentioned in section 2.3 here:

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Abilio Marques on Thu, 19 Mar 2015 21:08:55 -0430: (1) modify a file or files (2) add the files (every single time... this sucks sometimes, as Joerg said) (3) commit I'm not sure what (2) is unless you mean that I create new files in the working checkout and then use ``git add''

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

2015-03-19 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Abilio Marques on Thu, 19 Mar 2015 21:29:28 -0430: As a side note, one of the reasons I dislike git is because the commands don't do (do as in never) what their name imply, and some are hidden as subcommands inside commands that are meant for other purposes. You mean

[fossil-users] Convenient command for standardizing and simplifying marking a commit as a mistake.

2015-03-19 Thread Henry Adisumarto
Hi, I wonder why there isn't a command for simplifying the process of marking a commit as a mistake. So with a single command, fossil will: *Move the commit and its derived commits to mistake branch. *If there is a leaf in the branch, the leaf will be closed. *The

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Abilio Marques
Yeah, I know home directory MUST be writable. I do fight with that all the time. I've always guessed is some sort of weird security thing. Never asked. I'm not asking fossil to change because of that. As you say, is an OpenShift issue. Just thought fossil was of better use without global config

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Ron W
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:16:18AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, a...@gmx-topmail.de a...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: Content-Encoding: gzip Content-Length: 1516 So the question becomes: Should the Content-Length be the length of the content before or after compression? Fossil inherited the code for this from CVSTrac, which has always set the

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 09:59:24AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, a...@gmx-topmail.de a...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: Content-Encoding: gzip Content-Length: 1516 So the question becomes: Should the Content-Length be the

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread a...@gmx-topmail.de
Am 19.03.2015 um 00:01 schrieb a...@gmx-topmail.de: Am 18.03.2015 um 00:28 schrieb Tontyna: If that happened on my computer I'd recompile Fossil, commenting out the line #165 in winhttp.c : -- file_delete(zReplyFName); and have a look at the `fossil_server_P*_out*.txt` files. that's a good

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Thomas Schnurrenberger
On 14.03.2015 13:12, a...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: I am having problems to access my local fossil repositories with a recent versions of chrome, it looks like only part of the html code is served by the standalone webserver. My question is whether this is a known problem and others can verify it

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 09:59:24AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, a...@gmx-topmail.de a...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: Content-Encoding: gzip Content-Length: 1516 So the question becomes: Should the Content-Length be the length of the content before or after compression? Before aka

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:56:02PM -0400, Ron W wrote: I think there is some confusion of Content-Encoding vs Transfer-Encoding Content-Encoding is gzip, Transfer-Encoding should be unset as Fossil doesn't do HTTP/1.1 Chunked Transfers. Joerg ___

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Stephan Beal
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: I've also been reading in RFC 7230. The more I read, the more I believe this is a Chrome bug. http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec4.html#sec4.4 is pretty unambiguous: The transfer-length of a message is the

Re: [fossil-users] Possible Bug in Merge Conflict Blocks

2015-03-19 Thread Scott Robison
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:32 AM, bch brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: The reality is that nothing can be perfect for 100% of all possible use cases, and in this particular case, I just got unlucky. The merge conflict information as given couldn't support a mechanical pick one or the other

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:16:18AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 09:59:24AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, a...@gmx-topmail.de a...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: Content-Encoding: gzip Content-Length:

Re: [fossil-users] same port in use by concurrent fossil instances

2015-03-19 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Tontyna on Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:58:40 +0100: Starting several fossil servers with ui increments port from 8080 onwards. Starting several fossil servers with server increments port ditto. Mixing ui and server instances results in double-bound ports. Don't know whether that's a

Re: [fossil-users] home directory must be writeable

2015-03-19 Thread Warren Young
On Mar 18, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Abilio Marques abili...@gmail.com wrote: home directory /var/lib/openshift/54fb48714382ecec88eb/ must be writeable That sounds like just cause to complain to OpenShift tech support. There’s no good justification for $HOME to be read-only on a web platform

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread a...@gmx-topmail.de
Am 19.03.2015 um 15:19 schrieb Thomas Schnurrenberger: On 14.03.2015 13:12, a...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: I am having problems to access my local fossil repositories with a recent versions of chrome, it looks like only part of the html code is served by the standalone webserver. My question is

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread Richard Hipp
On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:16:18AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 09:59:24AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, a...@gmx-topmail.de

Re: [fossil-users] Possible Bug in Merge Conflict Blocks

2015-03-19 Thread bch
On Mar 19, 2015 12:40 AM, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:41 PM, bch brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: I tried this, and I see what you're talking about -- It's not clear to me it's an error (I'm not apologizing for anything that happened here, but I'd have

Re: [fossil-users] fossil ui not working with recent chrome browser

2015-03-19 Thread a...@gmx-topmail.de
Am 19.03.2015 um 16:53 schrieb Richard Hipp: On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:16:18AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/19/15, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 09:59:24AM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: