On 09/03/2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Welland wrote: > I'm in the mood for some long winded editorializing.... > > Bob Coder is moving his development team off of AntiquatedSCM and on to one > of the fancy new distributed SCMs that are all the rage. They look at git but > it seems kinda complicated and one of the devs suggests Fossil. Wow, nice, > simple, elegant, reliable, data storage design that looks trustworthy, solves > multiple problems with one executable. Cool. But in the evaluation it comes > to light that some legacy files with funky characters can't be checked in and > the only two solutions are to throw away or rewrite multiple megs of test > cases or to maintain a private branch of the Fossil source. Neither option is > tenable and Fossil is eliminated. > > So Fossil loses another potential advocate due to being devoted to a > philosophy of enforcing adherence to the lowest common denominator and the > ever pragmatic (albeit, bloody complicated) git gains another user. > > Sure, it is a silly story and who cares, fossil was not written to be > everything to everyone. But still, we've seen at least one real world variant > of this story reported to the list .... > > A strongly worded warning makes sense but I personally think a no-alternative > enforcement does not. > > IMHO a more viable philosophy is to use documentation and methodology to make > seamless interoperability between Windows and Unix/Linux possible for teams > that need it. Otherwise where possible and where the code cost is not too > high, independently make fossil work perfectly on Unix and perfectly on > Windows.
+1 In my experience, good software tools embody "best practice" out of the box, while accommodating existing "non ideal" practice (and leading the user gently from the latter to the former). Steve > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Leo Razoumov <slonik...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 14:30, <sky5w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > because of the hassle of re-working their multitudes of files or > > create/maintain Fossil branches using Richard's suggestion. > > > > If square bracket limitation is the only thing that make fossil > unacceptable to you then, please, consider making your own fossil > branch as Richard suggested. > > Actually, I found maintaining my own fossil branch quite easy. And my > changes are larger and more intrusive that commenting out couple of > lines of code. > > --Leo-- > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
