On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote:
> My summary: Some people "get it" and understand why Fossil is an > interesting idea. Others (perhaps due to different backgrounds or work > styles or expectations) cannot seem to grasp why anyone would ever consider > using Fossil. > The intermediate to advanced git users I've talked with seem to take the position that "version control is not a backup" means that "history is in the back ups". This then leads to "version control is better used to present a logical evolution of the projects's development". So far, with one exception, the projects I have contributed to only wanted to see the final version of a change - against the latest in the project repo. This meant pulling the latest, merging, resolving conflicts, testing, then pulling and merging again. Repeat until no conflicts. Then submit either a patch or a pull request. About 50% of the time I would get a "please pull latest and re-merge" response before getting any kind of accept/reject response. And about 50% of the accept responses included a request to pull and re-merge.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
