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

Hi Martin, Thank you for pointing that out, I somehow missed -p option. It seems "fossil timeline parents current -p " is somewhat verbose equivalent of what I expected from "fossil log ", with the exception of treating merges Thank you, Nikita On 11/01/2016 06:14 AM, Martin Gagnon wrote:

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

Thank you Martin for pointing out the timeline -p option, and thanks to the participants in this thread! Somehow I had overlooked both the -p option and the chng=GLOBLIST option for the web ui timeline---I am very happy to find them now! Somewhat related: the previously described feature I

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

On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 01:08:47AM -0400, Ron W wrote: >At the risk of wading in to a minefield, I have some thoughts. >On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:14 PM, ><[1]fossil-users-requ...@lists.fossil-scm.org> wrote: > > From: Nikita Borodikhin <[2]elit...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri,

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

At the risk of wading in to a minefield, I have some thoughts. On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:14 PM, wrote: > > From: Nikita Borodikhin > Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:02:33 + > > == combined log - history ananlysis == > > The most

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

Hi, >« Be concrete: how do you want tags to work which makes them entirely >different from branches? » I've said that tags and branches are the same technically speaking. However, for people those are not the same : for example the master branch is a special branch. When in git you do : git

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

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:35:46AM -0600, Warren Young wrote: > As far as I can tell, syncing to a remote repository locks the entire > remote repository, making it *worse* than Fossil, not better. (SQLite > concurrency locks only single tables, not the whole database, and then > only for writes,

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

On Oct 22, 2016, at 5:55 PM, K. Fossil user wrote: > > >« Branches in Fossil are just auto-propagating tags » > This is what they've said, technically at least. > For me this is not how I want it to be, because for most people tags are not > branches Be

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

Hi, On 10/22/2016 12:27 AM, Nikita Borodikhin wrote: == relative revisions - history analysis == In Fossil there is no way to refer to a parent of a revision, with the exception the parent of checked out revision. Can you give examples of why you’d need to do this? I mean, what’s wrong

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] 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

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] 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

: Samedi 22 octobre 2016 3h08 Objet : Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil Yes, and the impression I got is that the thing you are most concerned with is switching the community over to MatterMost. Personally, the exact method the community communicates is one of the least imp

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

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

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

Hi Andy, On 10/21/2016 12:53 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: Thus said Nikita Borodikhin on Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:02:33 -: == change sets - preparing the change == I often end up having several sets of unrelated changes. For example, one set is my temporary change to the build system to

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

Hi Warren, On 10/21/2016 07:21 PM, Warren Young wrote: On Oct 21, 2016, at 7:31 PM, Nikita Borodikhin wrote: I would like to be able to commit only needed changes: So say: $ fossil ci Makefile state_machine.c It’s actually less typing than defining a changelist and

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

The thing is I have to have both changes locally in order to fix the problem, but I do not want to commit some of them. Let me give you an example. Let's imagine I work on some embedded project. I have a device my project is targetted to, and I have a development board based on a slightly

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

On Oct 21, 2016, at 5:57 PM, K. Fossil user wrote: > > However, I was astonished by what a community manager answered to another guy. You say that like you think I hold some kind of official title. I’m just another Fossil user, like you. When I used that

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

-scm.org> Envoyé le : Vendredi 21 octobre 2016 18h14 Objet : Re: [fossil-users] features I'd like to have in fossil On Oct 21, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Nikita Borodikhin <elit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > == color support - review the change, history analysis == > > One should n

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

Thus said Nikita Borodikhin on Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:02:33 -: > == change sets - preparing the change == > > I often end up having several sets of unrelated changes. For example, > one set is my temporary change to the build system to disable some > things to make build process

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

(Fri, 21 Oct 12:14) Warren Young: > https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/checkin_names.wiki just found a typo: Index: www/checkin_names.wiki == --- www/checkin_names.wiki +++ www/checkin_names.wiki @@ -158,11

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

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 mercurial and a lot of tools have color support