[fossil-users] CLI timeline formatting issue

[j. van den hoff]

a minor thing but it causes me a bit of grief right now: currently, the  
timeline output is using whitespace as well as `-' as word boundaries when  
performing line wrapping/breaking. line wrapping can also happen,  
therefore, in the middle of branch names containing a minus, such as  
`sync-forwarn'. this might be OK if solely considered as a question of  
correct "hyphenation" of dashes-containing words. but I'd rather see  
branch names not split across two lines. and it comes really in the way if  
one wants to colorize the timeline output by a wrapper/filter injecting  
ansi color codes into the output since it would require special tests for  
the case where a `-' (minus) is the word boundary since the color codes  
cannot span multiple lines etc.


a minor request/question: could/should the line wrapping not be restricted  
to using real white space as word boundaries?


thx/joerg

--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] So far, unsuccessful attempt to make skin for fossil.

[John Found]

On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 14:54:04 -0400
Richard Hipp  wrote:

> This is a guess, because I don't really understand your problem:
> 
> Maybe add "" to the end of the header and add
> "" to the beginning of the footer?
> 
> -- 
> D. Richard Hipp
> d...@sqlite.org
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users


Well, it was really simple! Too bad, I didn't guess by myself.  

Thanks!

-- 
http://fresh.flatassembler.net
http://asm32.info
John Found 
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] So far, unsuccessful attempt to make skin for fossil.

[Richard Hipp]

On 4/29/15, John Found  wrote:
> I am trying to make fossil repository [2] to look like the home site of the
> project [1], but unfortunately
> in order to make the borders as on the site, I need div.content to has
> transparent background. In the same
> time, the background of the page must be white.
>
> In [1] I made it by using "div.paper" that contain no text and only serve to
> provide the proper border.
> It has transparent background and border-image with transparency (the
> tractor holes). All elements
> contained in "div.paper" have margin:0px in order to not have transparent
> gaps.
>
> Unfortunately, in the fossil generated HTML, the div.content element
> contains some text, not enclosed in
> any tags. This way, I can't make this text background white and it remains
> transparent.
>
> Any ideas how to make the trick? Is it possible at all?
>

This is a guess, because I don't really understand your problem:

Maybe add "" to the end of the header and add
"" to the beginning of the footer?

-- 
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

[fossil-users] So far, unsuccessful attempt to make skin for fossil.

[John Found]

I am trying to make fossil repository [2] to look like the home site of the 
project [1], but unfortunately
in order to make the borders as on the site, I need div.content to has 
transparent background. In the same
time, the background of the page must be white.

In [1] I made it by using "div.paper" that contain no text and only serve to 
provide the proper border.
It has transparent background and border-image with transparency (the tractor 
holes). All elements
contained in "div.paper" have margin:0px in order to not have transparent gaps.

Unfortunately, in the fossil generated HTML, the div.content element contains 
some text, not enclosed in 
any tags. This way, I can't make this text background white and it remains 
transparent.

Any ideas how to make the trick? Is it possible at all?

[1] http://fresh.flatassembler.net/
[2] http://fresh.flatassembler.net/fossil/repo/fresh/index

-- 
John Found 
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil clean --verily too strong???

[Jan Nijtmans]

2015-04-29 14:54 GMT+02:00 Richard Hipp :
> I don't mind the keep-glob setting as long as I have a convenient way
> to always override it (--verily).  I'm happy with trunk.

Sure, but your reasoning indicates that this never should have
been set as a versioned setting: Those settings are convenient
in MY build environment, but they should not have beeen imposed
on others with different environments. I didn't realize that
at the time.

Regards,
   Jan Nijtmans
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil clean --verily too strong???

[Richard Hipp]

On 4/29/15, Jan Nijtmans  wrote:
> 2015-04-29 14:21 GMT+02:00 Richard Hipp :
>> It was the (unpleasant) discovery of these patterns in the versioned
>> keep-glob setting of Fossil that prompted me to strengthen --verily to
>> overcome them.  When I want to remove unmanaged files, I want to
>> remove them *all*.
>
> Understood! In that case I propose to remove the versioned
> "keep-glob" setting:
> 
>
> Would that be acceptable to you?
>
> I never understood the need for "keep-glob" in addition
> to "ignore-glob", as they actually do the same: The
> versioned setting content for those is even the same.
>

I don't mind the keep-glob setting as long as I have a convenient way
to always override it (--verily).  I'm happy with trunk.
-- 
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil clean --verily too strong???

[Jan Nijtmans]

2015-04-29 14:21 GMT+02:00 Richard Hipp :
> It was the (unpleasant) discovery of these patterns in the versioned
> keep-glob setting of Fossil that prompted me to strengthen --verily to
> overcome them.  When I want to remove unmanaged files, I want to
> remove them *all*.

Understood! In that case I propose to remove the versioned
"keep-glob" setting:


Would that be acceptable to you?

I never understood the need for "keep-glob" in addition
to "ignore-glob", as they actually do the same: The
versioned setting content for those is even the same.

Thanks!
   Jan Nijtmans
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] fossil clean --verily too strong???

[Richard Hipp]

On 4/29/15, Jan Nijtmans  wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> First to tell, I'm very glad about the strenghtening of "fossil clean
> --verily".
> Second, I would like to keep the --keep option and the "keep-glob"
> setting function as earlier. There are two reasons:
>
> - In the fossil self-hosting repository, "keep-glob" looks as follows:
> $ cat .fossil-settings/keep-glob
> compat/openssl*
> compat/tcl*
> fossil
> fossil.exe
> win/fossil.exe

It was the (unpleasant) discovery of these patterns in the versioned
keep-glob setting of Fossil that prompted me to strengthen --verily to
overcome them.  When I want to remove unmanaged files, I want to
remove them *all*.  Not all except ones that somebody else thinks are
important, but *all* of them.  If I had my druthers, --verily would be
the default behavior of "fossil clean", and the annoying prompts and
the ignoring or keeping of some files would only happen with the
addition of command-line options.  Keep things simple and direct.  But
I understand that perhaps some users want a customizable interface so
I will not insist on that.  However, please do not try to weaken
--verily.  It is strong for a purpose.  If you don't like that
purpose, then don't use the --verily option.  If you want a weakened
version of --verily, then come up with a new option with a new name.

So, --verily will continue to ignore all settings.  I am willing to
modify --verily to honor additional --ignore or --keep options on the
command-line.  But --verily *shall* ignore all settings.  That is the
whole point of --verily.  Without that feature, we might as well just
take --verily out completely.

>   this is for a purpose: In compat/openssl* and compat/tcl* there sometimes
>   are (temporary) tcl/openssl builds, which I wouldn't like to be removed
>   completely. If I want to remove them, I simply do "rm compat/openssl*",
>   I don't need fossil for that.
>   The fossil executables are there to make sure that
>   "./fossil clean --verily" wouldn't try to remove itself while running.
>   Those are the only two practical uses of --keep/"keep-glob" I am
>   aware of, at least, that's how I am using it.
> - How about "fossil clean --verily --keep Makefile"?  Despite the -keep
>   option, the Makefile will still be removed.
>
> Regarding the other strengthening options, I agree!
>
> Thanks!
>  Jan Nijtmans
> ___
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>


-- 
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

[fossil-users] fossil clean --verily too strong???

[Jan Nijtmans]

Hello all,

First to tell, I'm very glad about the strenghtening of "fossil clean --verily".
Second, I would like to keep the --keep option and the "keep-glob"
setting function as earlier. There are two reasons:

- In the fossil self-hosting repository, "keep-glob" looks as follows:
$ cat .fossil-settings/keep-glob
compat/openssl*
compat/tcl*
fossil
fossil.exe
win/fossil.exe
  this is for a purpose: In compat/openssl* and compat/tcl* there sometimes
  are (temporary) tcl/openssl builds, which I wouldn't like to be removed
  completely. If I want to remove them, I simply do "rm compat/openssl*",
  I don't need fossil for that.
  The fossil executables are there to make sure that
  "./fossil clean --verily" wouldn't try to remove itself while running.
  Those are the only two practical uses of --keep/"keep-glob" I am
  aware of, at least, that's how I am using it.
- How about "fossil clean --verily --keep Makefile"?  Despite the -keep
  option, the Makefile will still be removed.

Regarding the other strengthening options, I agree!

Thanks!
 Jan Nijtmans
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users