Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

> * suggestions on what could be improved to make Fossil easier to use for me As a mere reader of the list, I have to ask: why should *the Fossil team* consider this important? You haven't presented any compelling reason to change significatively the way Fossil operates, besides that it would

Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

Hi, I don't have much time now but I just answer to what you've said : No I don't ask Fossil team to switch now over MatterMost.I ask them to think about it. I remind you that I am not the owner of the Fossil. It is not because I ask it for the Best of Fossil that it would mean that I do want

[fossil-users] typo on the download page

Hi there, here (https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/uv/download.html) are links like these: Version 1.35 => https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline?c=version-1.35;y=ci Version 1.34 => https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline?c=version-1.34;y=ci ... there should be '&' instead of ';' (i.e.

Re: [fossil-users] Can fossil bind to a single address?

I think it is reasonable to request a new option to 'fossil server" to bind to a single address (other than loopback). But I'm unwilling to make that change until the next release cycle. So are there any objections now to taking trunk as the 1.36 release so that we can move forward on these

Re: [fossil-users] Can fossil bind to a single address?

Thus said "K. Fossil user" on Fri, 21 Oct 2016 22:55:56 -: > However, xinetd or inetd are not recommended... I usually recommend tcpserver. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000580b97d7 ___ fossil-users mailing list

Re: [fossil-users] Can fossil bind to a single address?

Thus said "Andy Bradford" on 22 Oct 2016 13:34:42 -0600: > Do we want to address the bugs that Venkat Iyer recently reported with > the ticket command before or after 1.36? I believe at least the transaction bug is addressed by: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/1b6635a47fd8a1ad Now

Re: [fossil-users] Broke repository using command line.

Thus said Venkat Iyer on Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:39:11 -0700: > The icomment stuff must have recently changed. "User Comments" is > different than "comments". I used to do +comments and that used to > append to the end of the ticket before. But if I do that now, it shows > up *before* the

Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

Hi Richie, On 10/22/2016 06:40 AM, Richie Adler wrote: * suggestions on what could be improved to make Fossil easier to use for me As a mere reader of the list, I have to ask: why should *the Fossil team* consider this important? You haven't presented any compelling reason to change

Re: [fossil-users] remote check in

K, It would be helpful to the other members of this list if you would not chime in with provocative non-sequiturs when you don't know the answer. Just my humble opinion. Shal (see, you trolled me out of my lurking state) -- Shal Farley Cheshire Engineering Corporation

Re: [fossil-users] Broke repository using command line.

Thus said Venkat Iyer on Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:22:13 -0700: > I tried to find where that +icomment was coming from without much > success. Any advice appreciated. Fossil sqlite3 hackery is fine. fossil ticket ls fields shows icomment in my database. It looks like there should have been

[fossil-users] Why we should NEVER use inetd/xinetd

Hi, I was wondering if it is necessary to create a new thread just for inetd/xinetd... Two guys said this : >« Wait, what's wrong with inetd? » and, this : >« That ellipsis really should be filled in with more details. Would you >perhaps be willing to elaborate a bit on what you mean? » These

Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

On 10/22/16, Nikita Borodikhin wrote: > > What I expected from this post is, well, to share my problems with the > community. There was a chance I could get a discussion on the problems > to better understand what people think and whether they find it > important or not. That

Re: [fossil-users] OT: Why we should NEVER use inetd/xinetd

> On Oct 22, 2016, at 17:23, K. Fossil user > wrote: > P.S. : I will never understand why people don't know about security issue > when it comes to inetd. Aha, so this was a security concern. I figured just as much. Please read on. (: > I was explained to

Re: [fossil-users] Broke repository using command line.

Thanks for the reply Andy. I tried to keep you anonymous ). I had to fix it last night. I ended up doing this: 1. a fossil decostruct, 2. grepped through the files for +icomment, 3. deleted the file with that in it 4. fossil reconstruct 5. fossil sqlite3 hackery to restore project id 6.

Re: [fossil-users] Can fossil bind to a single address?

Thus said Richard Hipp on Sat, 22 Oct 2016 13:04:52 -0400: > I think it is reasonable to request a new option to 'fossil server" to > bind to a single address (other than loopback). Definitely, given that ``fossil server'' exists, one shouldn't have to rely on tcpserver or any other

Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

Hi, >« This is "fossil-users" mailing list, and it exists to share opinions, problems, issues, suggestions and so on, would you agree to that? » Exactly my tought. >« learning curve » I've said something about that. >« The less people use it - the less new ideas, less improvements and

[fossil-users] remote check in

I am trying to figure out how to use fossil for an upcoming project. I keep coming back to fossil as the alternatives (git, mercurial,...) are just... well I will go bald trying to figure them out. I made a test repository to play with and mostly figured out the command line commands. The

Re: [fossil-users] remote check in

Hi, >« So do people who have a check-in or a new file email the file to the administrator and they add/check-in, or do those people have command line access? » 1/ People don't really use Fossil : they do use git/mercurial/etc. 2/ Those who use Fossil use command line most of them. 3/ The purpose

Re: [fossil-users] remote check in

Scott, The problem I am having is how to add files, do check-ins and such via the UI, mostly regarding doing it remotely without command line access. I'm far from an expert user of fossil, but I believe the normal setup is to have a local copy of the repository, where command line access is

Re: [fossil-users] remote check in

Thus said Scott Doctor on Sat, 22 Oct 2016 15:40:33 -0700: > The problem I am having is how to add files, do check-ins and such via > the UI, mostly regarding doing it remotely without command line > access. It isn't possible to commit files to the repository using the Fossil UI. This is

Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

Hi Warren, On 10/21/2016 11:14 AM, Warren Young wrote: On Oct 21, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Nikita Borodikhin wrote: == color support - review the change, history analysis == One should not underestimate the significance of color on terminals these days, that's why both git and

Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

> If you color lines by meaing, it is easier to understand: Unless you're color blind, in which case it might be impossible to understand. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org

Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil

Color support should be customizable and should have global off switch. Not only color blindness is the issue, but also people have all sort of background colors on their terminals. Around me, I see black, gray, white, green and blue backgrounds. On 10/22/2016 12:35 AM, Scott Robison