On 8 Sep 2010, at 18:32, Richard Hipp wrote:
A key point is that the sync mechanism does not know anything about the
meta-information or the internal format of the artifacts. All sync knows is
that there is some set of artifacts on one side of the connection, and
another set of artifacts
On 26 June 2010 13:47, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 21:37, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
One of the reasons that I'm
On 26 June 2010 20:59, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
Indeed, the loss is at the end in case of web pages, parts which are
missing in the middle are result of inserting different streams so
SCSU would not suffer more breakage than other encodings. Still there
is no apparent benefit
On 25 June 2010 11:15, Sergey Sfeli sergey.sf...@gmail.com wrote:
Ruslan Popov wrote:
I've tried to use Fossil on russian version of Windows 7. I made commit with
russian text in comment, when I run the UI and look at timeline, I saw that
russian text looks like squares.
Why don't just
The trouble is that UTF-8 is a poor standard. It bloats many texts, is
quite expensive to parse, and has only one redeeming feature: It never
creates embedded nulls. I suppose that it shares its encoding with
ASCII is a feature too, but only a minor one.
Personally, I think that most systems
One of the reasons that I'm a fan of SCSU is that, with even a
relatively simple encoder, it produces output which is comparable in
efficiency to that of most legacy encodings.
On 25 June 2010 18:53, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 18:09, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph
On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
One of the reasons that I'm a fan of SCSU is that, with even a
relatively simple encoder, it produces output which is comparable in
efficiency to that of most
On 2 June 2010 18:11, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.com wrote:
Only 127.0.0.1 is privileged, right? So can we just not trust
X-Forwarded-For: 127.0.0.1 no matter who says it, and not worry if
X-Forwarded-For is abused otherwise?
No. Fossil keys its login cookies off the user's IP address.
On 31 May 2010 07:49, Paul Ruizendaal p...@planet.nl wrote:
Hi folks,
Two remarks:
1. I'm happy that more and more people are contributing to Fossil, but I'm
also a bit concerned about the increasing Posix dependence. The https code
builds in a dependence on libssl, and now the below patch
For those so interested, the modification is now being self hosted. See
http://fossil.e43.eu/fossil/. Anonymous cloning is allowed.
- Owen.
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
On 31 May 2010 15:01, Paul Ruizendaal p...@planet.nl wrote:
I'm really short on time right now, but I will try to help you in
making
this a cross-platform patch. I can test on WinXP, Linux and FreeBSD.
Can
you test on OS-X?
No, sorry. I can add OpenSolaris to the testing platforms
On 30 May 2010 02:59, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
CGI ... is highly inefficient. The http://www.sqlite.org/ and
http://www.fossil-scm.org/ websites are both run off of the same server
(check the IP addresses on the domains). The HTTP server there is a simple
home-brew job
I've finished modifying Fossil to support SCGI. Some notes:
- I rewrote the accept loop of the server/ui command at the same time. It
no longer uses select with a timeout in order to reap child processes;
instead, a signal handler is installed for SIGCHLD in order to reap them and
We are currently experimenting with setting up a Fossil server, but have
encountered a bit of an issue: Fossil doesn't seem to support being operated
behind a proxy. As we wish to run Fossil on port 80, and to do so it must
sit behind our primary web server, this is a bit of an issue.
The ideal
On 30 May 2010 00:53, Michael McDaniel fos...@autosys.us wrote:
I wound up running lighttpd for the sole purpose of serving fossil
via cgi scripts. lighttpd is pretty lightweight on resources.
~Michael
The idea has crossed my mind, but the idea of having to maintain another set
of
15 matches
Mail list logo
