On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 02:36:21PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Antoine Chavasse <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > About general reliability: I've never encountered any data > > loss/corruption with Fossil. > > ... > > > I am very trusty of fossiI. I compile it from trunk, I have an > > automated script that just updates to trunk, recompile fossil and do a > > > > Just for posterity's sake: +1. i've been using fossil daily since Dec 2007 > and have never once lost/corrupted anything. (Yet somehow every time i lay > my hands on a git repo i end up hosing it.)
I have a similar experience with git (specially as I use git-svn that has to be synched among different machines). And although not that an old experience, a similar with fossil too. In fact, I consider the robustness a big win over git, and very relevant when me or where I work for decided for fossil. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
