On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Graeme Pietersz <gra...@pietersz.net> wrote:
> The advantage is that anyone can create a Github fork of a public > project, work on it, and then submit pull requests, without ever being > given commit access to the original repo. You can have untrusted > collaborators and review all their contributions before they are merged > into your repository - you need not even have had any contact until you get > the pull request. > > What would be really nice would be a distributed version of this, so we > could all host our own repos and still collaborate as easily, but I doubt > anyone has a sufficient incentive to produce such a thing. > Assuming permissions are set appropriately, anyone can clone a Fossil repo, commmit changes to their clone, then send a pull request to the owner of the original repo. The key differences are that Fossil has no mechanism for mapping the incoming commits into branches of their own. The contributor must be sure to commit to her/his own branches. Alternately (and probably a good idea, anyway) is the the puller to clone her/his repo and pull into the clone for review. The recently implemented bundles feature has a mechanism for quarantining commits "pulled" from the bundle.If this mechanism could be made available for pulls directly from another repo, that would be handy.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users