Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:48 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: > IMO, putting a private, internally worked on repo behind a firewall is > good. > > There are many new features we'd all like Fossil to have but I'll take > fewer and fewer bugs over new features. ;) Agree on both points. __

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > What would still be missing would be some way of letting users decide > which tickets they wanted to be notified about. Customise the tickets table? > Another option would be to use a list server. But even with one that could automaticall

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Hi Ron, On 16 March 2015 at 14:41, Ron W wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:51 PM, jungle Boogie > wrote: >> >> Yes, this is a great plan. > > > I didn't say it was great or even good. Only that is what we were told to > do. Or not be allowed to generate email from the Fossil repos. > > IMO, put

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > What would still be missing would be some way of letting users decide > which tickets they wanted to be notified about. Customise the tickets table? > We added a custom field to hold email addresses. Similar to the CC field in Bugzilla. Y

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:51 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: > > Yes, this is a great plan. I didn't say it was great or even good. Only that is what we were told to do. Or not be allowed to generate email from the Fossil repos. ___ fossil-users mailing list

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 17/03/15 01:08, Ron W wrote: On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM, jungle Boogie mailto:jungleboog...@gmail.com>> wrote: You're right, it won't be private, so you'll be stuck having your password in some rss fetch thing. One would have to weigh the risks. Where I work, we allow - in F

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Hi Ron, On 16 March 2015 at 12:38, Ron W wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM, jungle Boogie > wrote: >> >> You're right, it won't be private, so you'll be stuck having your >> password in some rss fetch thing. One would have to weigh the risks. > > > Where I work, we allow - in Fossil - "nob

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: > You're right, it won't be private, so you'll be stuck having your > password in some rss fetch thing. One would have to weigh the risks. > Where I work, we allow - in Fossil - "nobody" to view the time line because only PCs connected to the

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Hi Grame, On 16 March 2015 at 12:10, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > > > On 17/03/15 00:27, jungle Boogie wrote: >> >> On 16 March 2015 at 11:33, Graeme Pietersz wrote: >>> >>> So you need an RSS to email script or service that can login to the >>> Fossil >>> site. >> >> Or permissions for nobody to vie

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 17/03/15 00:27, jungle Boogie wrote: On 16 March 2015 at 11:33, Graeme Pietersz wrote: So you need an RSS to email script or service that can login to the Fossil site. Or permissions for nobody to view the rss feed. I cannot find a separate RSS permission. Unless that exists and I hav

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 16 March 2015 at 11:33, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > So you need an RSS to email script or service that can login to the Fossil > site. Or permissions for nobody to view the rss feed. -- --- inum: 883510009027723 sip: jungleboo...@sip2sip.info xmpp: jungle-boo...@jit.si

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 16/03/15 22:30, Ron W wrote: On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Graeme Pietersz > wrote: On 16/03/15 13:30, Ron W wrote: > On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Graeme Pietersz mailto:gra...@pietersz.net>>

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:05 AM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > (there is a ticket change hook now?). > Supposedly there is, and other hooks, but I've never seen documentation. But, supposedly, the TH1 thus invoked by the hook can, if enabled, "touch" a URL. With an appropriately constructed URL, a s

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > On 16/03/15 13:30, Ron W wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Graeme Pietersz > > wrote: >> 1) email > notifications, the most important for me > > Can currently be accomplished > with external (to Foss

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: > On 13/03/15 20:55, Richard Hipp wrote: >>> Few organizations have the problem that the full power of Git solves. >> And yet many organizations voluntarily take on the problems that come >> with using Git. Weird. > >One shouldn't underes

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 16/03/15 13:30, Ron W wrote: On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Graeme Pietersz > wrote: No one system has all these, but looking at multiple ticket trackers, the obvious things to me are: 1) email notifications, the most important for me Can current

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 16/03/15 13:30, Ron W wrote: On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Graeme Pietersz > > wrote: > > No one system has all these, but looking at multiple ticket trackers, > the obvious things to me are: > > 1) email notifications, the most important for me > > > Can cur

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > No one system has all these, but looking at multiple ticket trackers, the > obvious things to me are: > > 1) email notifications, the most important for me > Can currently be accomplished with external (to Fossil) service, using, for exam

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 14/03/15 22:03, David Mason wrote: Thank you Graeme for your thought-provoking post. It seems most challenges and rebuttals have played out. Thank you. Yes, I think the discussion is nearly done. If anyone was mining this thread for ways to improve fossil, I think they'd see 2 things: 1

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 3/14/15, Ron W wrote: > > Yes, that and making sure the P card in wiki artifacts has the correct > parent in it. (Last time I checked, the Edit Wiki Page page did not have a > (hidden) field to identify the parent artifact.) > I think that works. See, for example, the wiki edit at https://www

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:33 PM, David Mason wrote: > 1) Fossil's ticket handling is not best-in-class. What are the key > features that would make it at least competitive? What features does > it have that are already better than most? (I've never used tickets, > although the integrated ticket

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Hi Dave, On 14 March 2015 at 09:33, David Mason wrote: > 1) Fossil's ticket handling is not best-in-class. What are the key > features that would make it at least competitive? What features does > it have that are already better than most? (I've never used tickets, > although the integrated ticke

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Thank you Graeme for your thought-provoking post. It seems most challenges and rebuttals have played out. If anyone was mining this thread for ways to improve fossil, I think they'd see 2 things: 1) Fossil's ticket handling is not best-in-class. What are the key features that would make it at l

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 14/03/15 05:20, Warren Young wrote: On Mar 13, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: On 14/03/15 03:01, Warren Young wrote: I believe that once you extract the hosting services from the comparison, Fossil comes out quite a bit ahead of Git. Even without hosted services, Git still has

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mar 13, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > > On 14/03/15 03:01, Warren Young wrote: >> I believe that once you extract the hosting services from the comparison, >> Fossil comes out quite a bit ahead of Git. > Even without hosted services, Git still has integration with the likes of >

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 13.03.2015 21:55, Richard Hipp wrote: On 3/13/15, Warren Young wrote: Few organizations have the problem that the full power of Git solves. And yet many organizations voluntarily take on the problems that come with using Git. Weird. Аnyway, Github won that game. In fact it is a good

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > 6. There are cases where Fossil’s single-executable philosophy really >> matters. The ones I’ve run into amounted to cross-compiling: it’s easier >> to build an ARM executable for a Chromebook or Raspberry Pi and copy just >> that across

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 14/03/15 03:01, Warren Young wrote: On Mar 13, 2015, at 6:40 AM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: My reply to this turned out to be rather long and a bit of rant, so I turned it into a blog post. Some critiques: 1. The post is visually divided into two sections, pro-Fossil and pro-Git, but the a

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 3/13/15, Ron W wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Graeme Pietersz > wrote: > >> I am rather stunned (and a tad concerned) that cars need 100m lines of >> code. > > > Cars don't really need that much code. The version controlled codebase might be ~5% "running code" and ~95% tests and do

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mar 13, 2015, at 3:37 PM, James Moger wrote: > > > What exists in the Git world to compare to Fossil as a private, > self-contained, all-in-one service? > > Feature-for-feature: GitLab > If you can live with less: Gitblit, Gerrit, RhodeCode, GitBucket, Stash…. Good, thank you. Graeme, com

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

> What exists in the Git world to compare to Fossil as a private, > self-contained, all-in-one service? > Feature-for-feature: GitLab If you can live with less: Gitblit, Gerrit, RhodeCode, GitBucket, Stash -J ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-use

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mar 13, 2015, at 6:40 AM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > > My reply to this turned out to be rather long and a bit of rant, so I turned > it into a blog post. Some critiques: 1. The post is visually divided into two sections, pro-Fossil and pro-Git, but the actual prose frequently intermixes pos

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > I am rather stunned (and a tad concerned) that cars need 100m lines of > code. Cars don't really need that much code. A luxury car could have electronic control modules in a lot of places you might not think of. I know I was surprised ye

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 14/03/15 01:45, bch wrote: On 3/13/15, Graeme Pietersz wrote: Obviously positing a link to fossil-users is a good way to have mistakes spotted! On 13/03/15 22:24, bch wrote: I am sure that Git has massive advantages for some people, particularly for large projects with huge numbers of co

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 14/03/15 01:34, Warren Young wrote: On Mar 13, 2015, at 1:59 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 01:50:19PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: The thing about most other large projects is that they do not have this highly-distributed hierarchical contribution model. You’re eith

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: > On 13/03/15 20:55, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> Few organizations have the problem that the full power of Git solves. > > And yet many organizations voluntarily take on the problems that come > > with using Git. Weird. > >One shouldn't und

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 3/13/15, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > Obviously positing a link to fossil-users is a good way to have mistakes > spotted! > > On 13/03/15 22:24, bch wrote: >>> I am sure that Git has massive advantages for some people, particularly >>> for large projects with huge numbers of collaborators. It was,

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 13/03/15 20:55, Richard Hipp wrote: >> Few organizations have the problem that the full power of Git solves. > And yet many organizations voluntarily take on the problems that come > with using Git. Weird. One shouldn't underestimate the power of "because everyone else does it". -- Kind R

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Obviously positing a link to fossil-users is a good way to have mistakes spotted! On 13/03/15 22:24, bch wrote: I am sure that Git has massive advantages for some people, particularly for large projects with huge numbers of collaborators. It was, after all, designed for the Linux kernel: the

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mar 13, 2015, at 1:59 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 01:50:19PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: >> The thing about most other large projects is that they do not have this >> highly-distributed hierarchical contribution model. You’re either one >> of the trusted few with

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 01:50:19PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: > The thing about most other large projects is that they do not have this > highly-distributed hierarchical contribution model. You’re either one > of the trusted few with a commit bit, or you are not. Actually, I think it is the other

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 3/13/15, Warren Young wrote: > > Few organizations have the problem that the full power of Git solves. > And yet many organizations voluntarily take on the problems that come with using Git. Weird. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-user

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mar 13, 2015, at 11:38 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > not many projects have as big a > developer base as does Linux. The key thing about Linux’s contributor base isn’t so much its size as its distributedness and hierarchical contribution paths. I’m sure other projects have as many or more li

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

That above quote looks to be attributed to me, but is in fact me quoting http://pietersz.co.uk/2015/03/fossil-vs-git :) , -bch On 3/13/15, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 3/13/15, bch wrote: >>> I am sure that Git has massive advantages for some people, particularly >>> for large projects with hug

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 3/13/15, bch wrote: >> I am sure that Git has massive advantages for some people, particularly >> for large projects with huge numbers of collaborators. As Stephan Beal has previously pointed out, Git is *designed* to forget things. This is a feature of Git, not a bug. Linus does not want to

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Perhaps a better reference for the cargo cult reference in my previous post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science :P -bch On 3/13/15, bch wrote: >> I am sure that Git has massive advantages for some people, particularly >> for large projects with huge numbers of collaborators. It wa

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

> I am sure that Git has massive advantages for some people, particularly for > large projects with huge numbers of collaborators. It was, after all, > designed for the Linux kernel: the largest software project ever (it is > approaching 18 million lines of code!) This[1] suggests otherwise. A

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 13/03/15 19:50, David Mason wrote: You have a typo in your post: Thanks, corrected. "only projects I use Git on are my own" pretty sure you meant Fossil in that phrase. Thanks, yes. I prefer to use Fossil, but when I take over something that is already version controlled it invariably u

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

You have a typo in your post: "only projects I use Git on are my own" pretty sure you meant Fossil in that phrase. On 13 March 2015 at 08:40, Graeme Pietersz wrote: > > > On 13/03/15 08:17, jungle Boogie wrote: >> >> Yes, I'm being optimistic about the userbase but we must agree Fossil >> to mu

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On 13/03/15 08:17, jungle Boogie wrote: Yes, I'm being optimistic about the userbase but we must agree Fossil to much easier and friendlier to use. Not always. My reply to this turned out to be rather long and a bit of rant, so I turned it into a blog post. I hope its not spammy to post a l

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Warren Young wrote: > On Mar 12, 2015, at 7:47 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: >> >> Hopefully some converts will check out the Fossil project. > > Unlikely. They’re offering an automated migration path to GitHub: > > https://code.google.com/export-to-github/ Should

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:47 AM, jungle Boogie wrote: > Yes, I'm being optimistic about the userbase but we must agree Fossil > to much easier and friendlier to use. > FWIW, judging solely from the mailing list traffic, Fossil use seems to have _exploded_ the past 6 months. The most active list

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

*preaching Yay, auto-spell. On Mar 12, 2015 10:04 PM, "bch" wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2015 7:47 PM, "jungle Boogie" wrote: > > > > Hi Warren, > > On 12 March 2015 at 19:36, Warren Young wrote: > > > On Mar 12, 2015, at 7:47 PM, jungle Boogie > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hopefully some converts will che

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mar 12, 2015 7:47 PM, "jungle Boogie" wrote: > > Hi Warren, > On 12 March 2015 at 19:36, Warren Young wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2015, at 7:47 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: > >> > >> Hopefully some converts will check out the Fossil project. > > > > Unlikely. They're offering an automated migration pa

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Hi Warren, On 12 March 2015 at 19:36, Warren Young wrote: > On Mar 12, 2015, at 7:47 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: >> >> Hopefully some converts will check out the Fossil project. > > Unlikely. They’re offering an automated migration path to GitHub: > > https://code.google.com/export-to-github/ > >

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Mar 12, 2015, at 7:47 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: > > Hopefully some converts will check out the Fossil project. Unlikely. They’re offering an automated migration path to GitHub: https://code.google.com/export-to-github/ The manual migration path recipes Google are providing don’t mention F

[fossil-users] Google code shutting down

Hello All, If no one has heard this yet: Google Code is to join the long list of Google projects that have been consigned to the dustbin of history. The open source project hosting service will no longer be accepting new project submissions as of today, will no longer be accepting updates to exist