Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On Tue 28 Nov 2017 10:36 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: > Thus said Richard Hipp on Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:41:55 -0500: > > > I have installed the new look (temporarily at least) on > > https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil so that we can live with it for a > > while to see how we like it. >

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Thus said Richard Hipp on Tue, 28 Nov 2017 22:33:04 -0500: > Maybe "Verbose" should be modified to include the hash up front This was one of the factors that actually lead to my #1 ranking for Verbose. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 40005a1e5143

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Thus said Richard Hipp on Tue, 28 Nov 2017 22:08:38 -0500: > Please offer your opinions on: > > https://www.fossil-scm.org/b/timeline I see that you've corrected one of the problems I mentioned previously which was the melding of different comments in the same branch by introducing

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On Tue 28 Nov 2017 10:40 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: > Thus said Richard Hipp on Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:41:55 -0500: > > > The big down-side is that less information is visible on a single > > screen now, so you have to scroll more. But that seems to be the trend > > with websites these days >

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Thus said Richard Hipp on Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:01:37 -0500: > As it was yesterday: >https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline Hard to stomach (as previously mentioned). > Warren Young's new approach: >https://www2.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline Slightly better, but still has the

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Thus said Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas on Mon, 27 Nov 2017 18:20:44 -0500: > I agree with Warren's design and improved readability by adding space. > Timeline now has more "air to breath" and is more pleasant to the eye. If you're talking about what is currently visible on

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Thus said Richard Hipp on Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:41:55 -0500: > The big down-side is that less information is visible on a single > screen now, so you have to scroll more. But that seems to be the trend > with websites these days There's another extremely annoying downside to this as

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Thus said Richard Hipp on Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:41:55 -0500: > I have installed the new look (temporarily at least) on > https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil so that we can live with it for a > while to see how we like it. I tend to prefer having more information to less, but

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

Yes, that project code is correct. While the Chisel page says shun-sha1 is on, the local repository has no such note on the schema version line. On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:20 PM Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > My hash-policy

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Richard Hipp wrote: > > "Verbose" mode now looks like legacy. > Thank you, much appreciated. -- Joe Mistachkin @ https://urn.to/r/mistachkin ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

A view of the dbpage branch of SQLite on the GitHub mirror: https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/commits/dbpage The same information from the latest experimental Fossil: http://www.sqlite.org/srcxb/timeline?ss=n=34=dbpage=ci -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

I like it. Thanks On 29 Nov 2017, 10:17 AM +0800, Warren Young , wrote: > On Nov 27, 2017, at 7:04 PM, Steve Landers wrote: > > > > Note that I would retain the rounded corners on Warren’s backgrounds, they > > make the visuals “softer”. > > You

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On 11/28/17, Joe Mistachkin wrote: > > Yeah, something like that would be cool. Also, having the "Leaf" indicator, > et al, up front as well (like before)? "Verbose" mode now looks like legacy. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On 11/28/17, Richard Hipp wrote: > > Limitations: > (5) The selected-entry highlighting is messed up for MS-Edge. Ex: https://www.fossil-scm.org/b/timeline?ss=n=2017-07-07 - suggestions for how to fix this are welcomed. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Richard Hipp wrote: > > Maybe "Verbose" should be modified to include the hash up front > Yeah, something like that would be cool. Also, having the "Leaf" indicator, et al, up front as well (like before)? -- Joe Mistachkin @ https://urn.to/r/mistachkin

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On 11/28/17, Joe Mistachkin wrote: > > Richard Hipp wrote: >> >> (1) You have a selection of styles: Normal, Compact, Verbose, >> Columnar. Each can be styled separately. >> > > Pretty please, can we have a "Legacy" style that gives the old look? > Maybe "Verbose" should

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Richard Hipp wrote: > > (1) You have a selection of styles: Normal, Compact, Verbose, > Columnar. Each can be styled separately. > Pretty please, can we have a "Legacy" style that gives the old look? I think not having the check-in at the front of the line is going to be a huge pain for me

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On 11/28/17, Richard Hipp wrote: > Please offer your opinions on: > > https://www.fossil-scm.org/b/timeline Other comparison repositories: http://mirror1.tcl.tk/tcl-b/timeline https://sqlite.org/b/timeline > > Changes: > > (1) You have a selection of styles:

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

Please offer your opinions on: https://www.fossil-scm.org/b/timeline Changes: (1) You have a selection of styles: Normal, Compact, Verbose, Columnar. Each can be styled separately. (2) The style selection, the number of elements in the timeline, and whether the timeline shows just

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On Nov 28, 2017, at 3:12 AM, Johan Kuuse wrote: > > I think the one important thing is that all involved HTML elements have a > 'class' or 'id' tag. Yes. Several times in making my last custom Fossil skin, I’ve had to employ some rather clever CSS selector trickery to target

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On Nov 27, 2017, at 7:04 PM, Steve Landers wrote: > > Note that I would retain the rounded corners on Warren’s backgrounds, they > make the visuals “softer”. You can have that without the stroked borders: td.timelineTableCell { border-radius: 10px;

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > My hash-policy is in fact just "auto", so this doesn't seem to be as > similar to my situation as I thought. OK. Let's verify that the project-IDs match. On chisel we have:

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

My hash-policy is in fact just "auto", so this doesn't seem to be as similar to my situation as I thought. On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:47 AM Jacob MacDonald wrote: > Thank you, I believe I changed the hash-policy locally. However, 2.1 > should support the new hash policies

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil-NG Bloat?

On Nov 28, 2017 11:08 AM, "Mike Burns" wrote: As much as I agree, software in general has moved on. You won't get > Fossil/SQLite running on a Commodore 64 without a lot of work. > With legacy platforms come legacy software that is either no longer > supported by the

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

Thank you, I believe I changed the hash-policy locally. However, 2.1 should support the new hash policies as well. Perhaps I need to tweak something on the Chisel side for them to work, though. On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:38 AM Martin Gagnon wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:01:45PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > On my end, I added a couple of local files in two commits. Then I ran > > "fossil sync". The commits do not show up on Chisel even though the sync > > command says it

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

2.4 [a0001dcf57] is what I'm running locally. On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:01 AM Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > On my end, I added a couple of local files in two commits. Then I ran > > "fossil sync". The commits do not show up

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > On my end, I added a couple of local files in two commits. Then I ran > "fossil sync". The commits do not show up on Chisel even though the sync > command says it succeeds. Furthermore, opening a new clone of the > repository from Chisel

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

I expect the sync to fail or for the state of the remote repository to match my local state. On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:51 AM Jacob MacDonald wrote: > On my end, I added a couple of local files in two commits. Then I ran > "fossil sync". The commits do not show up on Chisel

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

On my end, I added a couple of local files in two commits. Then I ran "fossil sync". The commits do not show up on Chisel even though the sync command says it succeeds. Furthermore, opening a new clone of the repository from Chisel seems to be corrupt: When I try to open it, it tells me the

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > http://chiselapp.com/user/jaccarmac/repository/adventofcode/index is the > broken repository. I can also package up my local instance of it/perform > whatever steps are necessary to debug. Let me know. From your original description, I

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

http://chiselapp.com/user/jaccarmac/repository/adventofcode/index is the broken repository. I can also package up my local instance of it/perform whatever steps are necessary to debug. Let me know. On Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 03:03 Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil-NG Bloat?

> > As much as I agree, software in general has moved on. You won't get > Fossil/SQLite running on a Commodore 64 without a lot of work. > With legacy platforms come legacy software that is either no longer > supported by the vendor, or is supported just because the vendor was paid > by that

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil-NG Bloat?

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 13:58:14 -0700 Warren Young wrote: > On Nov 23, 2017, at 5:19 AM, bytevolc...@safe-mail.net wrote: > > > > They want maximum results for minimum effort? That may be normal, but > > it's still whiney. > > If “normal” is “whiney”, it ceases to be a

Re: [fossil-users] Trolling GitHub for ideas

Le 25/11/2017 à 15:17, Richard Hipp a écrit : Your suggestions for useful features found in GitHub but missing from Fossil, or for pages in GitHub that work especially well and that you would like to see replicated in Fossil, are greatly appreciated. Applying a patch/diff from someone who has

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On 11/28/17, Johan Kuuse wrote: > I think it is impossible to get "one style fits all"... > Indeed. So my latest strategy is to provide a combobox in the submenu that lets the user selected between a small number of formats: "Compact", "Relaxed", "Detailed" (new name suggestions

Re: [fossil-users] Repository size - Fossil v. Git

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 08:53:06PM -0500, David Mason wrote: > Does it stay that size with moderate activity, or does it start growing > significantly? Incremental fastimport isn't that bad, but occassional repacks would still help. Of course, github doesn't allow triggering those remotely and

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On 25 November 2017 at 08:53, Richard Hipp wrote: > Send me your ideas of what you think timelines should look like.  Even > better: send me mock-ups. Since we’re at it, I’m going ahead with some other CSS suggestions. Here I’ve mostly focused on “calendar” demarcations which

Re: [fossil-users] A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 3:07 AM, David Mason wrote: > I would like yesterdays with a bit of whitespace between commit comments. > > Also someone liked the original because the checkin tag was in a > predictable place. If you put the tag last in the extra information it >

Re: [fossil-users] Weird behavior on Chisel, perhaps a version mismatch?

On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > I'm using 2.4 locally, Chisel says it's using 2.1. If I change a file in a > repository the changes go out properly but adding files to another > repository doesn't work. The push or sync seems to succeed, but the Chisel > web UI does not