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