Re: [fossil-users] Improvements to side-by-side diff

Another suggestion: Since visual diffs are always for text files (I think), it doesn't make much sense to mark partial words as changed. If the whole word is not unchanged, then the whole word is changed. I am referring to things like line 73817 on the left in the fourth link below. On Sat, Dec 15

[fossil-users] File moves reported in commit as file deletion!

Hello, I've done a number of fossil mv file.h source/code/ today, then issued a commit. The check-in reports that all of the files I've moved have been deleted and renamed. For example: "Deleted foo.c version [0e52b8b63a1e8c0d] Name change from from foo.c to source/code/foo.c." Why is a file

Re: [fossil-users] why does `fossil rm' not do the "real" thing?

I don't really care which behavior is the default. I've dealt with both long enough that neither is surprising, and my workflow doesn't change enough to notice for this. I'm just tired of seeing the bogus claim that one is somehow "surprising" and "natural" and one isn't. The only thing I want to

Re: [fossil-users] why does `fossil rm' not do the "real" thing?

Chad Perrin wrote: > > zsh: sports metaphor not found > Sorry, I was attempting to inject some humor into this discussion because it has grown very tedious. > > HDDs also suffer wear and tear during I/O operations, and new SSDs easily > last long enough that, relative to HDDs, this should no l

Re: [fossil-users] why does `fossil rm' not do the "real" thing?

Chad Perrin wrote: > > If you use bleeding edge versions, you should already be prepared to deal > with changes in behavior. I don't see the problem. > I help write the "bleeding edge" versions. Therefore, it is useful that I run them on a daily basis as well. > > There will always be someone

Re: [fossil-users] Ignoring Apple Xcode user files

ps: I found the following; http://stackoverflow.com/questions/49478/git-ignore-file-for-xcode-projects Xcode sure is a nightmare. ^K on Dec 16, 2012, Dmitry Chestnykh wrote: > >I use the following string for Admin > Settings > ignore-glob: > >*/xcuserdata/*,build/*,*.mode1v3,*.pbxuser,*.orig >

Re: [fossil-users] Ignoring Apple Xcode user files

on Dec 16, 2012, Dmitry Chestnykh wrote: > >I use the following string for Admin > Settings > ignore-glob: > >*/xcuserdata/*,build/*,*.mode1v3,*.pbxuser,*.orig Thank you Dmitry. What are your thoughts on: */xcuserdata/*,build/*,*.mode1v3,*.pbxuser,*.orig,*/DerivedData/* ^K > >-- >Dmitry Ches

Re: [fossil-users] Ignoring Apple Xcode user files

I use the following string for Admin > Settings > ignore-glob: */xcuserdata/*,build/*,*.mode1v3,*.pbxuser,*.orig -- Dmitry Chestnykh http://www.codingrobots.com On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:19 PM, K wrote: > Hello, > > Now that I wish to keep my Xcode project configuration 'file' in my repo, > I

Re: [fossil-users] Problem encountered while attempting to reflect project, file system reorganization in Fossil repo.

On 12/16/2012 03:08 PM, K wrote: kk, Thank you. Your timing is funny as I had *just* given up on waiting for help and tried again with success this time. What I did was deleted my whole source/ dir, leaving only my foo.fossil. (Luckily I had just done a commit before any of this reorganizat

Re: [fossil-users] why does `fossil rm' not do the "real" thing?

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 06:28:52PM -0800, Joe Mistachkin wrote: > Jan Danielsson wrote: > > > > First, I feel you're inventing problems to make arguments in order to > > exclude features which address real world issues. (A little like the > > script issue brought up earlier). > > Straw man argu

[fossil-users] Ignoring Apple Xcode user files

Hello, Now that I wish to keep my Xcode project configuration 'file' in my repo, I've run into some 'fun'. I say 'file' because project.xcodeproj is actually a dir, with both project configuration and user data in it. Apparently the Git workflow to handle this is: "echo 'xcuserdata/' >> .giti

Re: [fossil-users] why does `fossil rm' not do the "real" thing?

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:06:57AM -0500, daniel gregory wrote: > > I think we should write a patch… publish is and see how many people > actually use the patched version instead of the real version… then we'd > have an argument against the conservatives that just don't like change. That's not a

Re: [fossil-users] Problem encountered while attempting to reflect project file system reorganization in Fossil repo.

kk, Thank you. Your timing is funny as I had *just* given up on waiting for help and tried again with success this time. What I did was deleted my whole source/ dir, leaving only my foo.fossil. (Luckily I had just done a commit before any of this reorganization stuff) I did fossil open foo.fos

Re: [fossil-users] Problem encountered while attempting to reflect project file system reorganization in Fossil repo.

On 12/16/2012 K wrote: > I'm new to Fossil SCM, have not used any other SCMs, > and am trying to do something relatively complex for > me. It involves moving from a model where files are > directly added to my repo, rather than being organized > in the repo within directories. > > I had my proje

Re: [fossil-users] TICKETCHNG?

On 12/16/2012 09:13 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Ron Aaron > wrote: > > Thank you, that worked; but I had custom fields in my ticket > table, which I had to remember to save and then restore after the > change. > > Does th

Re: [fossil-users] TICKETCHNG?

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Ron Aaron wrote: > Thank you, that worked; but I had custom fields in my ticket table, which > I had to remember to save and then restore after the change. > > Does this need to be done on every repo I have or only on those with > non-standard ticket tables? It'

Re: [fossil-users] TICKETCHNG?

Thank you, that worked; but I had custom fields in my ticket table, which I had to remember to save and then restore after the change. Does this need to be done on every repo I have or only on those with non-standard ticket tables? It's rather an unfortunate thing to have to do... // On 12/16/20

Re: [fossil-users] TICKETCHNG?

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Ron Aaron wrote: > I just tried to write a ticket on an existing fossil repo, and get the > message "ERROR: SQL error: no such table: ticketchng". > > So I did a "fossil rebuild" on the repo, and I still get the error. > What is one to do? > Go to Admin/Tickets/T

Re: [fossil-users] why does `fossil rm' not do the "real" thing?

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 03:36:43PM -0800, Joe Mistachkin wrote: > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > > If you are not ready for changes in default behavior, don't upgrade to > > the next major version number. There is no good argument for software > > defaults to be set in stone for all time. Just use rea

[fossil-users] TICKETCHNG?

I just tried to write a ticket on an existing fossil repo, and get the message "ERROR: SQL error: no such table: ticketchng". So I did a "fossil rebuild" on the repo, and I still get the error. What is one to do? ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-use

Re: [fossil-users] why does `fossil rm' not do the "real" thing?

Disclaimer: 1) I care nothing about backward compatibility. 2) I only care about the efficiency of tools that I use to help me do my job. On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:02 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: > On 12/16/12 03:28, Joe Mistachkin wrote: > Still, I think I'm right. I don't think any of the issues