Re: [fossil-users] Fossil support level

Hi Dave, As with any open source project YMMV but I've been very grateful for the responsiveness of the fossil core team to important fixes. Looking at the open ticket list I see that some of the tickets left are controversial (for example one ticket is on whether or not an update should bring ba

[fossil-users] Fossil support level

Hi, Just discovered fossil and it looks interesting on several fronts. Currently using Mercurial. The only thing that concerns me is the ticket list. There are open Code_Defect tickets from 2009, and that doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. And after all, of your software toolkit, the part yo

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil "stash" does not allow aborting stash by exiting message editor

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:52 PM, James Masters > wrote > But this is not so with "stash" - it just goes in whether there is a >> message or not. I'm not sure if this is considered a bug or a feature... >> but I wanted to let you all know in

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil "stash" does not allow aborting stash by exiting message editor

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:52 PM, James Masters wrote: > But this is not so with "stash" - it just goes in whether there is a > message or not. I'm not sure if this is considered a bug or a feature... > but I wanted to let you all know in case you didn't already. > FWIW, i consider that a feature

[fossil-users] Fossil "stash" does not allow aborting stash by exiting message editor

Hi all, When you type "fossil stash", it prompts you for a stash message similar to "fossil commit". With "commit", you can exit the editor without adding a message, and then it will prompt you with the following message giving you a chance to abort the operation: empty check-in comment. contin

Re: [fossil-users] Ticket [967cedbf20]: fossil extra - Report for subtree

2013/6/28 Stephan Beal : > i dunno - it kinda looks like 3 minutes of your work to me: > > http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/c8253f4066 > > But the beer's still on the table, as it were, if you want to claim it. > > ;) Well, when I did this commit:

Re: [fossil-users] fsl gdiff prevents commit in parallel.

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > Here's my proposed patch, but i'm not at all sure if this is the proper > fix: > Nevermind - only certain ops run w/o the lock error with this change. An update still fails. Back to the drawing board... -- - stephan beal http://wanderi

Re: [fossil-users] fsl gdiff prevents commit in parallel.

On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> I agree, "fossil gdiff" should not keep the database locked. FWIW, the >> "fossil diff --tk" command does not keep the database locked, at least not >> that I have noticed. If "foss