On Aug 5, 2009, at 10:48 PM, Alec Clews wrote: > I've started to look at fossil as a small business process tool and > currently I use Git and GitHub for file management, which I'd like to > continue. The reason for using Git is a) It's very powerful and b) > it's a great way to share code. > > I'm testing a workflow where I think I can do the following > > 1) I create and use a git repo. My .gitignore file contains > > manifest > manifest.uuid > _FOSSIL_ > > 2) Open a fossil tree in the same directory and place the .git > subdirectory in fossil (fossil add .git) > > 3) use Git as intended, including sync with other repos and servers > such as GitHub > > 4) use fossil SCM to store a copy of my .git repo after each 'session' > (for some definition of session). I should be able to write some > wrapper scripts to add some of the meta data from git to fossil as > well > > Does this seem sensible? Anyone tried something similar, or > radically different? >
We do something similar on the SQLite project. The primary SCM system for SQLite is CVS. (Neither git nor any other distributed SCM system existed when SQLite was started.) But we like to do private branches in fossil. Fossil allows us to work off-line and we also find that fossil works much better over slow or unreliable internet connections. Note, however, that are plans are to convert SQLite over to fossil in the near future. So probably we will stop doing this kind of thing. There has been some discussion of some enhancements to fossil to make this kind of thing easier. Stay tuned for future announcements. D. Richard Hipp [email protected] _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
