Re: [fossil-users] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?
Thus said Stephan Beal on Fri, 17 Jul 2015 06:55:29 +0200: Or maybe it's just me! I disagree, I don't think it's you at all. Filtering problems are always due to faulty design or bad heuristics. If I filter email (or gmail in this case) that happens to be legitimate email, regardless of how similar that message might appear to be spam, that is the fault of my misguided filtering system, not the sender. Andy p.s. can you tell that I'm fed up with all the false positives with which free services like gmail seem to be plagued? :-) -- TAI64 timestamp: 400055a9163b ___ 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] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: Thus said Stephan Beal on Fri, 17 Jul 2015 06:55:29 +0200: Or maybe it's just me! I disagree, I don't think it's you at all. Filtering problems are always due to faulty design or bad heuristics. If I filter email (or gmail in this case) that happens to be legitimate email, regardless of how similar that message might appear to be spam, that is the fault of my misguided filtering system, not the sender. Andy p.s. can you tell that I'm fed up with all the false positives with which free services like gmail seem to be plagued? :-) After the report of mails mails landing in the spam folder i was curious, so here's a counterpoint... i just checked the most recent 200 spams in my gmail spam folder (that's _just_ the spam from the past 24 hours - i get just over 200 per day), and didn't find a single false positive. There are currently 6139 spams in that folder (those older than 30 days are automatically deleted) and i'm confident that only some diminishingly small percentage of them (under 1%) are not spam (unfortunate casualties of spam war). The main reason i use gmail is because it makes my email usable again - without its excellent spam filters my email would long since be useless. Maybe what happened... i once accidentally told gmail that a single G+ post notification was spam, and it started moving all G+ mails to spam for a few days before i noticed. i had to go back and mark them as not spam, and then it stopped. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf ___ 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] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?
Thus said Sergei Gavrikov on Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:21:55 +0300: I also expected that 'fossil amend uuid' will spawn $EDITOR with an original check-in message likes 'fossil commit' does. But, I met cold silence. Probably, to support $EDITOR for 'amend-commit' isn't trivial and I cannot insist on it, however, at least, we shall to see an error message. I think that having ``fossil amend uuid'' without any additional options spawn $EDITOR might be too much of an element of surprise. What do you think of --edit-comment: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/fbf7b54e72de0bb7 Also, should some of these options have a short option analog, for example: -u|--euser USER Make USER the check-in user -e|--edit-comment Launch editor to revise comment -d|--date DATE Make DATE the check-in time --bgcolor COLOR Apply COLOR to this check-in -c|--branchcolor COLOR Apply and propagate COLOR to the branch -t|--tag TAGAdd new TAG to this check-in -n|--cancel TAG Cancel TAG from this check-in -b|--branch NAMEMake this check-in the start of branch NAME -h|--hide Hide branch starting from this check-in -K|--close Mark this leaf as closed Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400055a9bc2b ___ 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] Any interest in testing/merging check-in-edit branch?
On phone, apologies for top posting. To me amend uuid should behave as much as possible like commit, though I can appreciate that some might disagree. On Jul 17, 2015 8:38 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: Thus said Sergei Gavrikov on Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:21:55 +0300: I also expected that 'fossil amend uuid' will spawn $EDITOR with an original check-in message likes 'fossil commit' does. But, I met cold silence. Probably, to support $EDITOR for 'amend-commit' isn't trivial and I cannot insist on it, however, at least, we shall to see an error message. I think that having ``fossil amend uuid'' without any additional options spawn $EDITOR might be too much of an element of surprise. What do you think of --edit-comment: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/fbf7b54e72de0bb7 Also, should some of these options have a short option analog, for example: -u|--euser USER Make USER the check-in user -e|--edit-comment Launch editor to revise comment -d|--date DATE Make DATE the check-in time --bgcolor COLOR Apply COLOR to this check-in -c|--branchcolor COLOR Apply and propagate COLOR to the branch -t|--tag TAGAdd new TAG to this check-in -n|--cancel TAG Cancel TAG from this check-in -b|--branch NAMEMake this check-in the start of branch NAME -h|--hide Hide branch starting from this check-in -K|--close Mark this leaf as closed Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400055a9bc2b ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
