[fossil-users] Merge two repositories... not.
So, I'm aware of drh's message from 2010-03-06 [1]. Is merging repositories this way still supposed to work? If so, I'll open a ticket with the information below. -Martin [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg01641.html # background: two teams working on some stuff, the fossil-using # team working on something that ended up being a subset of the # cvs-using team. Joerg's version of cvs2fossil made a fossil out # of the unitsdb team (see below). # The goal was to merge the resulting fossil with the subset that # the prefixes_derived team was working on, resulting in a single # fossil that contains both... $ mkdir merge $ cd merge fossil open ../unitsdb.fossil # ... snip, output deleted $ fossil info project-name: unnamed repository: /home/www/tmp/m/unitsdb.fossil local-root: /home/www/tmp/m/merge/ project-code: eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b server-code: dc2df780602e6d8561d1a7280acbe4aabfe15ad3 checkout: df5c154920608f11c26a4a98f3d179b792b1ef94 2011-08-24 20:20:09 UTC parent: 443c51cf173da58579e5457c7a634e3e51d85773 2011-08-18 15:58:06 UTC tags: trunk comment: (Martin) Checkin before I munge everything.. (user: wwwpl) $ cd .. $ fossil sqlite3 -R prefixes_derived.fossil SQLite version 3.7.7 2011-06-24 11:29:51 Enter .help for instructions Enter SQL statements terminated with a ; sqlite update config set value='eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b' where name='project-code'; sqlite .quit $ cd merge $ fossil ui -P 12345 $ cd .. $ mkdir pd $ cd pd $ fossil open ../prefixes_derived.fossil # snip and then project-name: Prefixed and Derived units repository: /home/www/tmp/m/prefixes_derived.fossil local-root: /home/www/tmp/m/pd/ project-code: eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b server-code: 67266cf692b50dd078ffee601caf7f345fa3d243 checkout: cccd2619d9fb3724f96a806f55f443837dbc9bbe 2011-08-16 23:33:50 UTC parent: f3876370ba605de6706717018ee0f41dde9d4df0 2011-08-11 21:13:35 UTC child:53c88f11df96c0156e9cbf3e0ba28905da261500 2011-08-16 23:38:07 UTC tags: trunk # project codes agree$ pwd /home/www/tmp/m/pd $ fossil push http://localhost:12345 Bytes Cards Artifacts Deltas Sent:7858169 0 0 Received:7928169 0 0 Sent: 295775322 14 1 Received:7270155 0 0 Sent: 274809307 16 0 Received:6518139 0 0 Sent: 273684292 15 0 Received:5813124 0 0 Sent: 286499289 3 0 Received:5672121 0 0 Sent: 338281281 8 0 Received:5296113 0 0 Sent: 325753276 5 0 Received:5061108 0 0 Sent: 294428269 6 1 Received:4732101 0 0 Sent: 267993199 25 45 Received:7129152 0 0 Sent: 251184169 14137 waiting for server... Now. The server sits here eating 100% CPU and increasing its memory usage -- and not doing anything else. right now this is how it looks from top(1): (pid user RR NI VIRT RES SHR %CPU %MEM TIME) 12375 wwwpl 33 8 2567m 1.3g 972 R 99.8 34.2 7:00.64 fossil This is fossil version 1.18 [df9da91ba8] 2011-07-13 23:03:41 UTC ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Merge two repositories... not.
Maybe consider moving everything on repo B to a separate branch, so that A is on trunk, B is on a branch. Then you can issue a merge command on the home computer, I imagine this would be easier that doing push / merge at the same time. Just a thought, but I haven't actually merged two fossil repos myself. Tomek On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Martin S. Weber martin.we...@nist.govwrote: So, I'm aware of drh's message from 2010-03-06 [1]. Is merging repositories this way still supposed to work? If so, I'll open a ticket with the information below. -Martin [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg01641.html # background: two teams working on some stuff, the fossil-using # team working on something that ended up being a subset of the # cvs-using team. Joerg's version of cvs2fossil made a fossil out # of the unitsdb team (see below). # The goal was to merge the resulting fossil with the subset that # the prefixes_derived team was working on, resulting in a single # fossil that contains both... $ mkdir merge $ cd merge fossil open ../unitsdb.fossil # ... snip, output deleted $ fossil info project-name: unnamed repository: /home/www/tmp/m/unitsdb.fossil local-root: /home/www/tmp/m/merge/ project-code: eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b server-code: dc2df780602e6d8561d1a7280acbe4aabfe15ad3 checkout: df5c154920608f11c26a4a98f3d179b792b1ef94 2011-08-24 20:20:09 UTC parent: 443c51cf173da58579e5457c7a634e3e51d85773 2011-08-18 15:58:06 UTC tags: trunk comment: (Martin) Checkin before I munge everything.. (user: wwwpl) $ cd .. $ fossil sqlite3 -R prefixes_derived.fossil SQLite version 3.7.7 2011-06-24 11:29:51 Enter .help for instructions Enter SQL statements terminated with a ; sqlite update config set value='eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b' where name='project-code'; sqlite .quit $ cd merge $ fossil ui -P 12345 $ cd .. $ mkdir pd $ cd pd $ fossil open ../prefixes_derived.fossil # snip and then project-name: Prefixed and Derived units repository: /home/www/tmp/m/prefixes_derived.fossil local-root: /home/www/tmp/m/pd/ project-code: eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b server-code: 67266cf692b50dd078ffee601caf7f345fa3d243 checkout: cccd2619d9fb3724f96a806f55f443837dbc9bbe 2011-08-16 23:33:50 UTC parent: f3876370ba605de6706717018ee0f41dde9d4df0 2011-08-11 21:13:35 UTC child:53c88f11df96c0156e9cbf3e0ba28905da261500 2011-08-16 23:38:07 UTC tags: trunk # project codes agree$ pwd /home/www/tmp/m/pd $ fossil push http://localhost:12345 Bytes Cards Artifacts Deltas Sent:7858169 0 0 Received:7928169 0 0 Sent: 295775322 14 1 Received:7270155 0 0 Sent: 274809307 16 0 Received:6518139 0 0 Sent: 273684292 15 0 Received:5813124 0 0 Sent: 286499289 3 0 Received:5672121 0 0 Sent: 338281281 8 0 Received:5296113 0 0 Sent: 325753276 5 0 Received:5061108 0 0 Sent: 294428269 6 1 Received:4732101 0 0 Sent: 267993199 25 45 Received:7129152 0 0 Sent: 251184169 14137 waiting for server... Now. The server sits here eating 100% CPU and increasing its memory usage -- and not doing anything else. right now this is how it looks from top(1): (pid user RR NI VIRT RES SHR %CPU %MEM TIME) 12375 wwwpl 33 8 2567m 1.3g 972 R 99.8 34.2 7:00.64 fossil This is fossil version 1.18 [df9da91ba8] 2011-07-13 23:03:41 UTC ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Merge two repositories... not.
May be fossil export of one piped on a fossil import of the other one will work!! I never tried but it might work I don't know how would look like the timeline when doing that... -- Martin Le 2011-08-24 à 16:55, Martin S. Weber martin.we...@nist.gov a écrit : So, I'm aware of drh's message from 2010-03-06 [1]. Is merging repositories this way still supposed to work? If so, I'll open a ticket with the information below. -Martin [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg01641.html # background: two teams working on some stuff, the fossil-using # team working on something that ended up being a subset of the # cvs-using team. Joerg's version of cvs2fossil made a fossil out # of the unitsdb team (see below). # The goal was to merge the resulting fossil with the subset that # the prefixes_derived team was working on, resulting in a single # fossil that contains both... $ mkdir merge $ cd merge fossil open ../unitsdb.fossil # ... snip, output deleted $ fossil info project-name: unnamed repository: /home/www/tmp/m/unitsdb.fossil local-root: /home/www/tmp/m/merge/ project-code: eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b server-code: dc2df780602e6d8561d1a7280acbe4aabfe15ad3 checkout: df5c154920608f11c26a4a98f3d179b792b1ef94 2011-08-24 20:20:09 UTC parent: 443c51cf173da58579e5457c7a634e3e51d85773 2011-08-18 15:58:06 UTC tags: trunk comment: (Martin) Checkin before I munge everything.. (user: wwwpl) $ cd .. $ fossil sqlite3 -R prefixes_derived.fossil SQLite version 3.7.7 2011-06-24 11:29:51 Enter .help for instructions Enter SQL statements terminated with a ; sqlite update config set value='eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b' where name='project-code'; sqlite .quit $ cd merge $ fossil ui -P 12345 $ cd .. $ mkdir pd $ cd pd $ fossil open ../prefixes_derived.fossil # snip and then project-name: Prefixed and Derived units repository: /home/www/tmp/m/prefixes_derived.fossil local-root: /home/www/tmp/m/pd/ project-code: eeb7e06236b08dc4b57b6ab3b957fe5756c64f5b server-code: 67266cf692b50dd078ffee601caf7f345fa3d243 checkout: cccd2619d9fb3724f96a806f55f443837dbc9bbe 2011-08-16 23:33:50 UTC parent: f3876370ba605de6706717018ee0f41dde9d4df0 2011-08-11 21:13:35 UTC child:53c88f11df96c0156e9cbf3e0ba28905da261500 2011-08-16 23:38:07 UTC tags: trunk # project codes agree$ pwd /home/www/tmp/m/pd $ fossil push http://localhost:12345 Bytes Cards Artifacts Deltas Sent:7858169 0 0 Received:7928169 0 0 Sent: 295775322 14 1 Received:7270155 0 0 Sent: 274809307 16 0 Received:6518139 0 0 Sent: 273684292 15 0 Received:5813124 0 0 Sent: 286499289 3 0 Received:5672121 0 0 Sent: 338281281 8 0 Received:5296113 0 0 Sent: 325753276 5 0 Received:5061108 0 0 Sent: 294428269 6 1 Received:4732101 0 0 Sent: 267993199 25 45 Received:7129152 0 0 Sent: 251184169 14137 waiting for server... Now. The server sits here eating 100% CPU and increasing its memory usage -- and not doing anything else. right now this is how it looks from top(1): (pid user RR NI VIRT RES SHR %CPU %MEM TIME) 12375 wwwpl 33 8 2567m 1.3g 972 R 99.8 34.2 7:00.64 fossil This is fossil version 1.18 [df9da91ba8] 2011-07-13 23:03:41 UTC ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Way too much pink
I really do appreciate all the patches to Fossil that have been coming in lately. Thanks for the help!!! But if you look at the timeline ( http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline?c=2011-08-24n=40) you'll see that contributors are putting changes in branches to which they have assigned a background color or red or pink. I don't have any fundamental objections to pink, but I would prefer it to be used in moderation. For a month now (ever since http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/c946b573c7) Fossil has been choosing branch colors automatically based on a hash of the branch name. And this technique has proven remarkably effective. Behold the the appearance of the timelime ( http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline?c=2011-08-24n=40brbg) when Fossil gets to choose its own branch colors. You still see a pink branch now and then, but like I said before, an occasional pink branch is fine. It only gets annoying when every branch is pink. Would anybody object if I go back to the initial check-ins on some of the pink branches, and remove their explicit color tag, thus allowing Fossil to pick its own branch colors? Once again, thank you all for the contributions. I'd rather have pink contributions than no contributions at all. But contributions in a variety of pleasing earth-tones would be better still! -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Merge two repositories... not.
On 08/24/11 18:14, Martin Gagnon wrote: May be fossil export of one piped on a fossil import of the other one will work!! I never tried but it might work I don't know how would look like the timeline when doing that... Actually I did try fossil deconstruct'ing both repositories into the same directory with reconstructing it afterwards. The progress reaching 102.1% made me think it picked up the rest, but it didn't. Note though that I did not adjust the project code before I did the deconstruct/reconstruct. Also I assume that a clash of hashes is unlikely, but not impossible this way (but, then again, I assume the same problem (or let's call it probability) exists for pushing content like drh suggested 1.5 years ago). -Martin ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Fossil at Freshmeat
Hi, I took the liberty to submit Fossil to Freshmeat. The URL is: http://freshmeat.net/projects/fossil Anyone with a Freshmeat account is welcome to rate or write a comment. While all my published projects are nearly oneliners, I've had a pretty nice experience with Freshmeat. It seems that a lot of people use it to search for software for Linux. Furthermore, a few sites aggregate entries from it, further spreading the hype. Anyhow, I hope that this brings a nonzero number of users ;) I'll submit every new numbered release to it. If I go missing for whatever reason, don't worry, I gave access to the entry to drh. Kind regards, Remigiusz Modrzejewski ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
