Fossil bundles are a great feature, and may be useful to implement pull (or "push") requests.
But I would like to have some more flexibility and control when "applying" (or importing) bundles by third parties: * Let me decide where the bundle is committed, be it directly on trunk instead of on a separate branch, or on a different base than initially used to create the bundle (with notifications about merge conflicts, if any). * Let me decide whether the bundle is committed "step-by-step", as in the branch contained in the bundle, or "all-at-once", like an "accumulated patch", which may already be enough history to record for the upstream project (the submitted original bundle could still be archived separately, if required). * Allow me to make additional changes to the "accumulated patch" prior to committing, for minor "on-the-fly" fixes to comments and coding style. * Let me edit the check-in comments, branches and tags myself, so they can have some "standard format" for contributed contents, such as: "Patch to achieve ... contributed by ..." (tags: contribution) I'm aware that check-in comments an tags can be edited later, but even then, the original comments contained in the bundle will still be recorded, and they may contain e-mail addresses, trade secrets, passwords, or other confidential information, if third parties are allowed to introduce comments into my repositories. And rejecting a submitted bundle solely due to a check-in comment causes at least some extra effort for either side, as merely editing the comment and re-exporting the bundle won't remove the relevant comment from the history. --Florian _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
