On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:28 AM, j. van den hoff <veedeeh...@googlemail.com>
wrote:

my understanding was that a github "fork" is nothing but a clone and not
> "really" part of the original project, no? so it really is not comparable
> to a branch (be it `git' or `fossil'), no?
>

Almost the same as pulling from a clone of a Fossil repo.

The key difference is that, in git, the puller can force the in coming
commits to be remapped into branches of their own. That is, I could commit
my changes to "trunk" in my clone, then when the other person pulls my
changes, she/he can tell git to map my changes into "ronw-trunk".
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Reply via email to