Richard Hipp wrote:
On 5/15/15, Lluís Batlle i Rossell<vi...@viric.name> wrote:
I also dislike that branches are not part of the stored history, and
nothing can be checked about old branches (integrated, destroyed, etc).
Huh. I didn't realize that. You mean that there is nothing
equivalent to https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/brlist in Git? GitHub
seems to give me some nothing of a list of branches (though clearly
not as useful as the page linked above). Maybe this is only branches
that still have a HEAD - that have not been merged and closed?
Can you talk more about this problem, from the point of view of
someone whose Git experience is limited?
Andreas and Lluis have already already answered this pretty well, but
I'll go ahead and copy a post of mine from fossil-users a while back
<https://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users%40lists.fossil-scm.org/msg16007.html>:
One serious problem I have with Git's branching model, though, is that
the branch names don't really name branches.
If I want to go back and dig through the history of an old "feature-x"
branch, I get the commit that the feature-x ref is currently pointing
to along with every other ancestor of that commit -- including every
ancestor of the commit that feature-x branched out of and the ancestry
of every other commit that's been merged into the feature-x branch.
Well, okay, but that's not really what reasonable human beings
conceptualize as a branch.
This is, of course, assuming that the "feature-x" ref still exists. In
Git, it is common practice for people to delete a ref (even from the
remote repository) after the branch has been merged. To me, this
really does amount to deleting history.
Fossil branches are actual branches, and I find this very helpful. As
an example, I fairly often find myself wanting to look back at a
specific commit that I remember. I obviously don't have the artifact
ID memorized. I only vaguely remember when it was created. While the
commit message was clear and descriptive, I don't remember it, and
searching for keywords that I think appear in it returns nothing. If I
could go back in time, I would give it a tag. But heck, even Git
doesn't include a time machine yet.
However, I do remember the branch name (and even if I don't, I can
easily find it in the list of closed branches). Firing up "fossil ui"
and going to /timeline?r=feature-x narrows it down to a handful of
commits.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to hearing another of your talks, Richard. I
always learn a ton from them.
_______________________________________________
fossil-dev mailing list
fossil-dev@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-dev
