Re: [fossil-users] please remove "git import honours timezone" from trunk

Thus said David Given on Thu, 01 May 2014 23:01:50 +0100: > Are you sure that get merged? I remember asking for a sign-off a > couple of times, but never got a response, and eventually abandoned > it. It actually did get merged: http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/timeline?dp=1aef260f4c0a0

Re: [fossil-users] please remove "git import honours timezone" from trunk

Thus said Jan Nijtmans on Thu, 01 May 2014 16:25:18 +0200: > Maybe the idea is good, but the sign of the timezone > correction was wrong, (Just a wild guess! ) I just tested and it's not the sign of the timezone. I created a simple git repository and then ran through fossil import -

Re: [fossil-users] please remove "git import honours timezone" from trunk

On 1 May 2014 21:13, "Ingo Struck" wrote: [...] > author Foo Bar 1398953212 +0200 > > The timestamp is given in seconds since the Unix epoch, > (unix time) which is a value already in UTC. The timezone > information is informative. It may be used to change > fossil's timezone information during i

Re: [fossil-users] please remove "git import honours timezone" from trunk

On 1 May 2014 15:25, "Jan Nijtmans" wrote: [...] > This work was done by David Given in > the dg-timestamps branch: Are you sure that get merged? I remember asking for a sign-off a couple of times, but never got a response, and eventually abandoned it. --David (away from computer) _

Re: [fossil-users] Merging two leaves not on the same graph?

I think that initial empty commits went in at my request. Iirc, so I could have related (but not inheriting from trunk) vendor branches. Can we review/discuss before axing? On May 1, 2014 1:06 AM, "Jan Nijtmans" wrote: > 2014-05-01 7:24 GMT+02:00 Gerald Gutierrez : > > So now I'm confused. Should

Re: [fossil-users] please remove "git import honours timezone" from trunk

Hello Jan, On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 04:25:18PM +0200, Jan Nijtmans wrote: > 2014-05-01 15:56 GMT+02:00 Ingo Struck : > > However, the logic that "honours timezones" is plain wrong > > and leads to a permanent error during the first hours after > > the checkout. > > Thanks for the report! > > This

Re: [fossil-users] Merging two leaves not on the same graph?

Talked with Roy on the Tcler's chat. [12:54]aku, The 8MB limit is incorrect -- it's really 2GB (IIRC) but the page doesn't say that [12:55]There might be a timeout for Clone Repo in terms of the CGI wait -- I can fix that if there is so that the clone happens async. if it doesn't a

Re: [fossil-users] Merging two leaves not on the same graph?

Note also that chiselapp has a "Clone Repo" option under the "Create Repo" page. IOW if you are able to expose your repo via 'fossil server' on some http(s) url you can then clone it into the new chiselapp. Not sure however what limits apply there (size-, or time-wise). Might be useful to ask Roy

Re: [fossil-users] Merging two leaves not on the same graph?

On 5/1/2014 2:11 AM, Gerald Gutierrez wrote: Too big. Chiselapp has an 8MB upload size limit. That explains it. You created a new repository and pushed to it, but that new repository had that unwanted empty commit, set to the current date and time. Whenever I convert an existing project to

[fossil-users] 1st Call For Papers, 21th Annual Tcl/Tk Conference 2014

21'th Annual Tcl/Tk Conference (Tcl'2014) http://www.tcl.tk/community/tcl2014/ November 10 - 14, 2014 Embassy Suites Downtown Portland, Oregon, USA Important Dates: Abstracts and proposals due Sep 8, 2014 Notification to authors Sep 22, 2014 Author materials dueOct 20, 2

Re: [fossil-users] please remove "git import honours timezone" from trunk

2014-05-01 15:56 GMT+02:00 Ingo Struck : > However, the logic that "honours timezones" is plain wrong > and leads to a permanent error during the first hours after > the checkout. Thanks for the report! This work was done by David Given in the dg-timestamps branch:

[fossil-users] please remove "git import honours timezone" from trunk

Hello fossil developers, I am switching from git to fossil and decided to use compiled sources from trunk (003db810a282b3ba), according to http://www2.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/tip/www/build.wiki (Aside: Is it really safe to use...) However, the logic that "honours timezones" is plain wrong and l

Re: [fossil-users] Merging two leaves not on the same graph?

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Jan Nijtmans wrote: > I think it would be better if fossil didn't create the initial empty > commit any more: > > That would avoid the confusion, and it works fine! > > Any objections merging this to trunk? >

Re: [fossil-users] Merging two leaves not on the same graph?

2014-05-01 7:24 GMT+02:00 Gerald Gutierrez : > So now I'm confused. Should/can I merge these two leaves, or just leave it > alone, or is the repository now in an inconsistent state? The only way I see to get rid of the second 'initial empty commit' is by logging in as admin and 'shun' the artifact

Re: [fossil-users] Merging two leaves not on the same graph?

Too big. Chiselapp has an 8MB upload size limit. On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Andy Goth wrote: > On 5/1/2014 12:24 AM, Gerald Gutierrez wrote: > >> I've got a fossil repository that has had two years' worth of history. >> Recently, I decided to host it on chiselapp, so I created a reposito