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

Thus said Jungle Boogie on Tue, 28 Nov 2017 22:08:58 -0800: > In which mode? I think this is only an issue in the compact mode, > right? Yes, after further experimentation, the problem only exists with the Compact mode. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 40005a1fa5b8

Re: [fossil-users] diff coloring missing?

On Nov 29, 2017 9:29 PM, "Jungle Boogie" wrote: > > Hi All, > > I don't think this is just an issue with my browser... > > https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/c94f6085489effe6 > > In previous builds, this commit would certainly have a number of green > lines, but

[fossil-users] diff coloring missing?

Hi All, I don't think this is just an issue with my browser... https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/c94f6085489effe6 In previous builds, this commit would certainly have a number of green lines, but that's not the case anymore. Same with the unified diff version, too:

[fossil-users] Fossil 2.4 symlink regression (Linux x64)

Hi all, I'm a long-time users of fossil. Recently I upgraded from fossil 1.35 to fossil 2.4, and found the following problem about symlinks. It seems that the allow-symlinks settings doesn't work properly. Steps to reproduce: 1. fossil init /tmp/x.fossil 2. mkdir /tmp/x; cd /tmp/x; fossil

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

On 11/29/17, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: >> >> For example, if checkin [1234abcd] has a comment that refers to ticket >> [bcdef522] which in turn refers to artifact ID [6543cfe], is the >> migration tool expected to chase and re-point all those links when all >> the hashes change? >

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

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 03:36:07PM -0700, Warren Young wrote: > On Nov 29, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:02:11PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > >>> Ah, I see. It seems

Re: [fossil-users] Trolling GitHub for ideas

On Sat 25 Nov 2017 9:17 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > The SQLite project is mirrored on GitHub (not by me). This mirror > provides a good opportunity to compare the interfaces of GitHub and > Fossil using the same underlying data. > > https://sqlite.org/srcx/timeline?basic >

Re: [fossil-users] Clone a repo served by a winsrv service

Hello, Le 24/11/2017 à 08:16, Stephan Beal a écrit : On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Stéphane Aulery > wrote: Yet an error form winsrv feature. I try to clone a new repo and get this error : $ fossil clone -v http://fossil/eulalia/

Re: [fossil-users] Windows make fail: mkcss.c

On 29 November 2017 at 15:06, jungle Boogie wrote: > Hi All, > > First time to compile Fossil on Windows in awhile, so this might me a > fault of my own doing. > > ..\src\../skins/original/header.txt > ..\src\../skins/plain_gray/css.txt ..\src\../skins/plain_gr >

Re: [fossil-users] Windows make fail: mkcss.c

On 29 November 2017 at 15:06, jungle Boogie wrote: > Hi All, > > First time to compile Fossil on Windows in awhile, so this might me a > fault of my own doing. I'm using Microsoft Visual Studio 2017, by the way. ___

[fossil-users] Windows make fail: mkcss.c

Hi All, First time to compile Fossil on Windows in awhile, so this might me a fault of my own doing. ..\src\../skins/original/header.txt ..\src\../skins/plain_gray/css.txt ..\src\../skins/plain_gr ../skins/plain_gray/header.txt ..\src\../skins/rounded1/css.txt ..\src\../skins/rounded1/details

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

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 03:36:07PM -0700, Warren Young wrote: > On Nov 29, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:02:11PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > >>> Ah, I see. It seems

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

On Nov 29, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:02:11PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: >> On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: >>> Ah, I see. It seems strange to me that the policy didn't get set when I >>> cloned. How can I

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

Thanks for the help, all. I still don't completely understand what happened but things are sane again! On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:11 PM Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:02:11PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > > On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald

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

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:02:11PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > Ah, I see. It seems strange to me that the policy didn't get set when I > > cloned. How can I avoid the same thing in the future and is there any way > > to change the

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

On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > "manifest checksum does not agree with disk", seen when cloning the bad > repo for the first time and trying to open in. That sounds like it is missing some content files. Once you sync up the two repos, that problem will go away. --

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

"manifest checksum does not agree with disk", seen when cloning the bad repo for the first time and trying to open in. On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:01 PM Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > So I'll just have to reconcile the two

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

On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > So I'll just have to reconcile the two histories manually? I'm super > confused by the manifest message since it makes it sound like the artifacts > were not shunned, just stored where I can't see them somehow. It should just sync up, as

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

So I'll just have to reconcile the two histories manually? I'm super confused by the manifest message since it makes it sound like the artifacts were not shunned, just stored where I can't see them somehow. On Wed, Nov 29, 2017, 12:25 Jacob MacDonald wrote: > I believe so.

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

I believe so. On Wed, Nov 29, 2017, 11:13 Martin Gagnon wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:02:11PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > > On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > > Ah, I see. It seems strange to me that the policy didn't get set when I > > >

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

Focusing on the Compact view: Is there any chance to limit the click action to just the ellipses? And to revert, click on the added content, Ex. "check-in:" or "user:". As others mentioned, it is annoying when selecting text from the comments to have the background action. On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at

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

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:02:11PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > Ah, I see. It seems strange to me that the policy didn't get set when I > > cloned. How can I avoid the same thing in the future and is there any way > > to change the

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

On 11/29/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > Ah, I see. It seems strange to me that the policy didn't get set when I > cloned. How can I avoid the same thing in the future and is there any way > to change the artifacts in the local repository to SHA3? There is no good way to change

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

Ah, I see. It seems strange to me that the policy didn't get set when I cloned. How can I avoid the same thing in the future and is there any way to change the artifacts in the local repository to SHA3? On Wed, Nov 29, 2017, 05:39 Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/28/17, Jacob

Re: [fossil-users] CSP for Fossil. Was: A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:50 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > Apparently what I would need to do is generate HTML without all of the > onclick= and style= attributes Yes. > but make sure every element has an id= attribute. Or at least a class attribute, when you want multiple elements

[fossil-users] CSP for Fossil. Was: A-B comparison of proposed timeline changes

On 11/29/17, Warren Young wrote: > > Strict CSP can be a pain, alas. I have come to notice that myself. Futhermore, by separating code and data into separate files, it makes the system more obscure and difficult to maintain. There is lots of onclick= and style= happening

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

On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:26 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > On 11/29/17, Warren Young wrote: >> >>https://imgur.com/a/TEWjA > > I think we'd like the selection mechanism to somehow highlight the > entire row I don’t think it really helps, but this gets you

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

On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:27 AM, Martin Gagnon wrote: > >> It can be fixed by adding href="#" into the elements > > Using "Inspect" on chrome, I found that adding: > > cursor: pointer; > > inside "element.style" fix the problem. That feels more heavy-handed to me. My

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

Hi Andy, On 29/11/17 00:45, Andy Bradford wrote: > 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

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

On 11/29/17, Warren Young wrote: >> >> Still looks goofy in the Modern View, especially using Edge. Your >> help in fixing that problem will be much appreciated. > > It’s applying the style to the containing rather than to the that > most of the recent changes have been

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

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 08:10:28AM -0700, Warren Young wrote: > On Nov 29, 2017, at 7:53 AM, Martin Gagnon wrote: > > > > There's a small display glitch, the mouse cursor over the > > Basic/Advanced button is set to "text selection" mode instead of the > > usual "hand with the

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

On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:16 AM, Warren Young wrote: > > [*] To be clear, that means the element ends up with two classes. Even more clear: ... td.timelineSelected { border-width: 2px; background-color: #ffc; box-shadow: 4px 4px 2px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.5); }

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

On Nov 29, 2017, at 7:26 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > The "selected entry" highlighting, such as seen here: > >https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline?c=trunk > > Still looks goofy in the Modern View, especially using Edge. Your > help in fixing that problem will be

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

On Nov 29, 2017, at 7:53 AM, Martin Gagnon wrote: > > There's a small display glitch, the mouse cursor over the > Basic/Advanced button is set to "text selection" mode instead of the > usual "hand with the index finger up" for clickable links. It can be fixed by adding

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

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:26:57AM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > The 4-view-modes timeline change is now on trunk and is the default on > these sites: > > https://sqlite.org/src/timeline > https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline > http://mirror1.tcl.tk/tcl/timeline >

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

The 4-view-modes timeline change is now on trunk and is the default on these sites: https://sqlite.org/src/timeline https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline http://mirror1.tcl.tk/tcl/timeline https://androwish.org/index.html/timeline The "selected entry" highlighting, such as

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

On Nov 28, 2017, at 9:07 AM, Mike Burns wrote: > > > You won't get Fossil/SQLite running on a Commodore 64 without a lot of work. > > What are the chances someone will take up take up this challenge, and have a > Commodore 64 or Apple II version of fossil up and

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

On 11/28/17, Jacob MacDonald wrote: > > While the Chisel page says shun-sha1 is on, That could be a problem. That means chisel is rejecting any SHA1 artifacts. The only want to change that is via command-line - there is no web interface to set the hash policy. The command