Re: [fossil-dev] Current status of make test?

Thus said Ross Berteig on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:54:03 -0800: > Letting the full test suite run in-tree fails almost immediately > because amend.test called repo_init which cannot be run inside a > checkout. Any tests that require their own repository will fail if you run it from within

Re: [fossil-dev] Current status of make test?

On 1/7/2016 8:36 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: Thus said Ross Berteig on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:54:03 -0800: Letting the full test suite run in-tree fails almost immediately because amend.test called repo_init which cannot be run inside a checkout. Any tests that require their own

Re: [fossil-dev] RFC: new manifest card: G

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > I agree with Joe. I think a tag would be more appropriate for this. > i agree - i hadn't considered that option. > Besides that, the G card is already used in a branch. See > >

Re: [fossil-dev] Current status of make test?

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > > On a related note, I am dropping a signed Contributer Agreement in the > mail to Richard today. Once I work out (and document) how to run the test > suite "properly", my intent is to extend it to cover JSON support.

Re: [fossil-dev] RFC: new manifest card: G

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:46 PM, Joe Mistachkin wrote: > > Stephan Beal wrote: > > > > i've actually been programming in C today, back-porting in the zip fix > into > > libfossil, and i had an idea... > > > > Also see the follow-up check-in for fixing the method for

Re: [fossil-dev] RFC: new manifest card: G

Stephan Beal wrote: > > i've actually been programming in C today, back-porting in the zip fix into > libfossil, and i had an idea... > Also see the follow-up check-in for fixing the method for zero-byte files. > > The G ("generator" or "generated by") card is an optional manifest card with >