Hi,
>« You say that like you think I hold some kind of official title. I’m just
>another Fossil user, like you »OKAs I stated, the Fossil Team does not use
>marketing as they should.However you could be one day a good Community Manager
>for Fossil. :-)
>« I think one should use Fossil on its own terms, not try to treat it like
>Git, yes » [etc.]
At least we agree on something... at last. :-D
>« Branches in Fossil are just auto-propagating tags »
This is what they've said, technically at least.
For me this is not how I want it to be, because for most people tags are not
branches (Marketing again).
In another word, why am I using branches when as I've said tags suffice ? Hmm ?
>« your typical Fossil server simply doesn’t have all that much concurrency
>going on.»
That is why I used to say that Git is better for big projects.
>« If you feel I’m wrong, go port Fossil to Oracle or whatever, and then we’ll
>see if it’s gotten faster. I think it’ll get slower, but you go and prove me
>wrong »
Oracle no. Another one will go faster if it is in a cluster.
>Server loads that I've talked about...
Server loads will be higher if there are too many access (too many people too
many changes at the same time for example): and Fossil is a web server.
However, as I said, Fossil is not widely used and to be clear I don't think
that many access would occur because team are not that big when it comes to
Fossil.
Fossil is a niche nothing else. I would like it to be more than that but my
great expectations are not for tomorrow.
I can admit that it [concurrency and so on] is not such a big issue, but then
this means that I was right when I've said that git is better because too many
access is not a big deal for git. :-D
>« My largest Fossil repo is currently running at a 39:1 compression ratio »
Hmm.. It's seems good.
When I've said that it may create too much information I mean that it takes too
much resources (size, access, etc.).
However, I've got here a fossil file that is 6.8M in size when the git tar.gz
one is 7.1M.
I want to point out that the git file is a clone of the original git repository
so everything is there !
>« Who did say that? »
a) People said that poll is not needed, in another word we don't need marketing
at all...
b) I won't ask for marketing [approach] if the Fossil Team is a marketing
user.c) if you don't know about marketing it is the same as if you say no.
>« What *I* said is that answering user questions, triaging feature requests,
>and improving the Fossil feature set is not “marketing.” »
a) ... that is why I've said that Fossil don't know what marketing is, and
neither you do.
b) Answering [...] feature set IS marketing, to be clear it IS communication.
Communication IS a set/portion/part of marketing.
Send bad communication and then you lose customers.
It's very hard to earn customers and I pretend that it is better to try to keep
them, which is a marketing strategy.
Didn't I ask for "another approach, for example a marketing approach" ? Hmm ?
Sorry if I hurt : I've said that Truth is better.
(I try not to hurt when I could but obviously it is not time for lies, at least
not here [at home])
I encourage you to speak to other people as usual. That is what I do expect.
Best Regards
K.
De : Warren Young
*snip*
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
