I really dislike autoconf - a feeling cultivated through years of experience
trying to use it. And I think I'm probably not alone in that feeling. I've
tried to avoid having to use autoconf in Fossil and have been reasonably
successful at that for the first 5 years. But I think we may be
(4) The result should have a 0 Fail-Score according to
https://www.theopensourceway.org/wiki/How_to_tell_if_a_FLOSS_project_is_doomed_to_FAIL
This point is not easy to acomplish. Take into acount the following
statement in the previous page:
You've written your own source control for this
dear all
a scenario and a question
i have changed files xxx yyy and zzz and am at revision [12345678] as an
exanple
i am happily commiting changes to my fossil scm when i type
fossil commit -m test
rather than
fossil commit -m test xxx
now I have committed all my changes to fossil rather
just my 2 cents..
maybe premake4 could make a sense?
quoting their site (http://industriousone.com/what-premake):
Premake is a plain old C application, distributed as a single
executable file. It is small, weighing in at around 200K. It does not
require any additional libraries or runtimes to be
On Jun 13, 2011, at 16:03 , Richard Hipp wrote:
(4) The result should have a 0 Fail-Score according to
https://www.theopensourceway.org/wiki/How_to_tell_if_a_FLOSS_project_is_doomed_to_FAIL
Does this imply introduction of properly numbered releases? ;)
Your project does not do versioned
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Ramon Ribó ram...@compassis.com wrote:
(4) The result should have a 0 Fail-Score according to
https://www.theopensourceway.org/wiki/How_to_tell_if_a_FLOSS_project_is_doomed_to_FAIL
This point is not easy to acomplish. Take into acount the following
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski l...@maxnet.org.pl
wrote:
On Jun 13, 2011, at 16:03 , Richard Hipp wrote:
(4) The result should have a 0 Fail-Score according to
https://www.theopensourceway.org/wiki/How_to_tell_if_a_FLOSS_project_is_doomed_to_FAIL
Does this
At the moment all my components are in a single folder, and I'd like to
import them into fossil as separate repositories. I guess this is more of a
Git question - but has anyone done this before?
___
fossil-users mailing list
I'm not sure about command line, but I think you can accomplish that action
by going to the web ui, clicking on the check-in in question, clicking
edit and selecting the Branching option labelled Make this check-in
the start of a new branch named:.
I think that's what it's for... haven't tried
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Tomek Kott tkott.s...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure about command line, but I think you can accomplish that action
by going to the web ui, clicking on the check-in in question, clicking
edit and selecting the Branching option labelled Make this check-in
the
If this was a full-blown Tcl then you could do
dict keys [concat {*}$twoDlist]
but I suspect that TH1 has neither dictionaries nor the {*} operator.
How about
set oneDlist
foreach pair $twoDlist {lappend oneDlist [lindex $pair 0]}
Paul Higham
Tel +1 408 522 6225
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Steve Havelka smh...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it necessary that it's autoconf? Or would you take a CMake-based build
script?
The GNU autotools have a lot of traction in the community, and a wide
variety of people are familiar with them. This makes a compelling
case
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Steve Havelka smh...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it necessary that it's autoconf? Or would you take a CMake-based build
script?
ccmake is not installed by default on either my iMac nor my SuSE Linux
desktop. So it a a non-starter.
If you have a way other than
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:27:49 -0400
Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
If you have a way other than autoconf to generate a universal build
script that runs on any unix machine without special software
installed, then that will be fine. CMake does not qualify because it
is not installed by
14 matches
Mail list logo
