hoping that this does not generate so much turbelence as the mv/rm issue did:
I've stumbled over this behavior: -- there is a user account on a remote repo created for me (with commit access) -- I do the clone a la `fossil clone http://myname@URL myrepo.fsl and I'm asked correctly for the password of user `myname'. -- I open my repo, edit stuff and commit/push -- commit/push turns out to use my $USER (local user name) and that's how it appears on the remote sites timeline well, I was heavily surprised which "proofs" that PLOS was violated. (least surprising always being that things don't work at all...). I would find it far more intuitive if _after_ a `clone' of the above sort (password query for `myname' and all) the corresponding local user would be created automagically and also be set to the default user so that I'm directly interacting correctly with the remote server. presently (and that's the parallel to the mv/rm discussion) I have to perform manual interaction (create user with password (take care to use the same as on the server here?) and make him the default user) which again 99.9% of the time should be what the user wants anyway (and might be really surprised to not have happened autmatically). right or wrong? j. -- Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
