Brian Smith writes:
Hi All,
I've been playing with fossil for a few weeks now and I've come to
quite like it.
I was a tad disappointed that a git import tool hadn't been written
so, I went ahead and did that.
You can find the tool at:
pasqualinoferrentino-fos...@yahoo.it writes:
Conclusions.
The size winner is git, but only with the gc --aggressive command,
Well, just after sending this message I thought that I could try
another approach, I wanted to find a theoretical low limit of the
project size.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:38 PM, D. Richard Hipp d...@hwaci.com wrote:
Fossil repositories do not normally need to be vacuumed. The
exception is when they have been newly constructed such as by clone -
which vacuums automatically, or by the Git import tool. (Does that
Git import tool vacuum
Brian Smith writes:
I notice that the number you give and the number fossil reports don't
quite match up. Did the conversion happen correctly? If not would you
be willing to share some details about the repository (# of branches,
# of tags, # of merges (in particular merges involving
Just a quick update. I had a spare hour or so, so, I extended it to
support tags. I'm still looking to see about branches.
Thanks,
-B
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Brian Smith br...@linuxfood.net wrote:
I've not used svn in ages, but if the need/want arises I might take a
stab at it. :)
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 01:33:07 Brian Smith wrote:
Hi All,
I've been playing with fossil for a few weeks now and I've come to
quite like it.
I was a tad disappointed that a git import tool hadn't been written
so, I went ahead and did that.
Very cool! So... do you want to do something
I've not used svn in ages, but if the need/want arises I might take a
stab at it. :)
IMO, the easiest way to handle svn repos is to just require a certain
layout for the repository. I'm aware of another tool or two that do
that. And, if you're in possession of one of those multiple project
svn
7 matches
Mail list logo
