[fossil-users] script-friendlier progress-indicator when cloning

2014-06-04 Thread Michai Ramakers
Hello, is there a way to make 'fossil clone' a bit less verbose for use in scripts? I am using clone to make a consistent temporary copy of a repo. Ideas are welcome, Michai ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org

Re: [fossil-users] script-friendlier progress-indicator when cloning

2014-06-04 Thread j. van den hoff
On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 10:36:41 +0200, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, is there a way to make 'fossil clone' a bit less verbose for use in scripts? I am using clone to make a consistent temporary copy of a repo. Ideas are welcome, what about something like fossil clone

Re: [fossil-users] script-friendlier progress-indicator when cloning

2014-06-04 Thread Michai Ramakers
right, something like that would work, I guess... Thanks, Michai On 4 June 2014 10:44, j. van den hoff veedeeh...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 10:36:41 +0200, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, is there a way to make 'fossil clone' a bit less verbose for use in

Re: [fossil-users] Question regarding ancestors and Q-card relations.

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: Thus said Andy Bradford on Tue, 03 Jun 2014 21:59:21 -0600: Does the Q-card here not imply any relation with c14a4a93d5a3 which will be picked up in trunk? It seems I did not understand this very well: A

[fossil-users] diff file in checkout against its previous version

2014-06-04 Thread Michai Ramakers
Hello, perhaps a quick question: is it possible to diff a file in the current checkout against a previous version of itself, regardless of how long ago the last change occurred? (diff --from prev --to current does not always work, in case the file was changed some checkins ago) Of course using

Re: [fossil-users] diff file in checkout against its previous version

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, perhaps a quick question: is it possible to diff a file in the current checkout against a previous version of itself, regardless of how long ago the last change occurred? You can view the complete

Re: [fossil-users] diff file in checkout against its previous version

2014-06-04 Thread Michai Ramakers
On 4 June 2014 15:12, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, perhaps a quick question: is it possible to diff a file in the current checkout against a previous version of itself, regardless of how long ago the

Re: [fossil-users] diff file in checkout against its previous version

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: On 4 June 2014 15:12, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, perhaps a quick question: is it possible to diff a file in the

Re: [fossil-users] diff file in checkout against its previous version

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: I don't recall implementing anything to do that from the command-line. But on the other hand, there is a lot of stuff in Fossil that others have implemented and a lot of stuff that I implemented but then forgot about. i

Re: [fossil-users] diff file in checkout against its previous version

2014-06-04 Thread Martin Gagnon
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 03:21:10PM +0200, Michai Ramakers wrote: On 4 June 2014 15:12, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, perhaps a quick question: is it possible to diff a file in the current

Re: [fossil-users] diff file in checkout against its previous version

2014-06-04 Thread Michai Ramakers
On 4 June 2014 15:51, Martin Gagnon eme...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 03:21:10PM +0200, Michai Ramakers wrote: On 4 June 2014 15:12, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, perhaps a quick

Re: [fossil-users] git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: You're mixing things up :) Rebase is just a script around new branch starting at given base, cherry-pick all the commits from the base to the head of what's being rebased. It's a script, literally. It can't break

[fossil-users] anyone have a fossil binary for Android ARM9?

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
Hi, all! i just got an ODROID-U3 device and i'm now looking for a fossil binary... does one of you have a link to a Fossil binary for Android running on an ARM9 processor? ODroid: http://hardkernel.com/main/products/prdt_info.php Many thanks in advance! -- - stephan beal

Re: [fossil-users] anyone have a fossil binary for Android ARM9?

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, all! i just got an ODROID-U3 device and i'm now looking for a fossil binary... does one of you have a link to a Fossil binary for Android running on an ARM9 processor? http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil-beagle.gz

Re: [fossil-users] anyone have a fossil binary for Android ARM9?

2014-06-04 Thread Martin Gagnon
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 05:20:11PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote: Hi, all! i just got an ODROID-U3 device and i'm now looking for a fossil binary... does one of you have a link to a Fossil binary for Android running on an ARM9 processor? ODroid:

Re: [fossil-users] anyone have a fossil binary for Android ARM9?

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, all! i just got an ODROID-U3 device and i'm now looking for a fossil binary... does one of you have a link to a Fossil binary for Android

Re: [fossil-users] anyone have a fossil binary for Android ARM9?

2014-06-04 Thread Martin Gagnon
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 05:37:21PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, all! i just got an ODROID-U3 device and i'm now

[fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: You're mixing things up :) Rebase is just a script around new branch starting at given base, cherry-pick all the commits from the base to the

[fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: Mercurial too had heavy-duty branches only, then they added bookmarks that are very similar to git branches. Since a bookmark is just a

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: Mercurial too had heavy-duty branches only, then they added

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: f merge bk:trunk typo, but you get the idea. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: Mercurial too had heavy-duty branches only, then they added

Re: [fossil-users] anyone have a fossil binary for Android ARM9?

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Martin Gagnon eme...@gmail.com wrote: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_-jB7mK7jpXUUZKQW5vcEFnRkE/edit?usp=sharing Thanks! i just got it compiled on Xubuntu 13.10 on the ODroid. Running from a MicroSD (as opposed to eMMC, because Android is on my eMMC chip),

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: Right, the index is a very light-weight mechanism for giving the user power in deciding what to commit. I.e., more fine-grained control than choose what files to commit. My view is that the Git staging area (I

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread B Harder
Indeed, non-propagating tags are also checkout-able items. What am I missing about bookmarks that we can't already enjoy w/ tags, outside of new syntax ? -bch On 6/4/14, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: On Wed,

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:53 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed, non-propagating tags are also checkout-able items. What am I missing about bookmarks that we can't already enjoy w/ tags, outside of new syntax ? Here's something that you get for free with Fossil's model that

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 6:53 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed, non-propagating tags are also checkout-able items. What am I missing about bookmarks that we can't already enjoy w/ tags, outside of new syntax ? i envision them as being lightweight, i.e. local, non-versioned.

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:53 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed, non-propagating tags are also checkout-able items. What am I missing about bookmarks that we can't already enjoy w/ tags, outside of new syntax

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread B Harder
Because the internet can be a poor medium to express emotional intent, let me preface this with: Stephan, you know I have the utmost respect for your coding chops, and we _mostly_ fall in line wrt design philosophy. That said: I'm shaking my head, wondering why? My current mental image is:

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread B Harder
sb fossil bk add xp experimental:2011-06-04 I can imagine this being useful at least occasionally. I'm still loathe to include it in core fossil, but it'd be a great task for a little tool. -bch On 6/4/14, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: Because the internet can be a poor medium to

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:16 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: I'm shaking my head, wondering why? My current mental image is: http://perl-begin.org/humour/perl6_perl_6_cover_lg.jpg Reminds me of the on-on-on-oh-so-nausiatingly-ongoing JSON standardization efforts on the IETF mailing

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:21 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: sb fossil bk add xp experimental:2011-06-04 I can imagine this being useful at least occasionally. I'm still loathe to include it in core fossil, but it'd be a great task for a little tool. In the core, basically the

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Bookmarks. That's a nice idea, actually. Added to my TODO list. i

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: To be truly useful it has to be possible to [selectively] push/pull bookmarks. If that's the case then they really provide no benefits over propagating tags (which are versioned), but note that Fossil cannot

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:53 AM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed, non-propagating tags are also checkout-able items. What am I missing about bookmarks that we can't already enjoy w/ tags, outside of new syntax ? In git, tags and branches are both very light-weight bookmark-like

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: In the core, basically the only addition would be adding another block to symbolic_name_to_rid(), which simply expands the ... part from bk:... from the bookmark list, then runs that result through through

Re: [fossil-users] Question regarding ancestors and Q-card relations.

2014-06-04 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Richard Hipp on Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:47:43 -0400: The merge logic in Fossil recognizes when the same exact change is merged more than once and avoids conflicts in that case. The Q-cards are not necessary for this. What am I doing wrong then? In this case, I did a

Re: [fossil-users] Question regarding ancestors and Q-card relations.

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: Thus said Richard Hipp on Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:47:43 -0400: The merge logic in Fossil recognizes when the same exact change is merged more than once and avoids conflicts in that case. The Q-cards are not

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:53 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed, non-propagating tags are also checkout-able items. What am I missing about bookmarks that we can't already enjoy w/ tags, outside of new syntax

Re: [fossil-users] Question regarding ancestors and Q-card relations.

2014-06-04 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Richard Hipp on Wed, 04 Jun 2014 13:48:48 -0400: No merge is perfect. Apparently you hit a bad case. But I do similar things all the time on actual source code and rarely have problems. Ok, thanks. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding. I can offer up the repository

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: To be truly useful it has to be possible to [selectively] push/pull bookmarks. If that's the case then they really provide no benefits over

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: - when you checkout a tag and then commit something, the tag doesn't move with the HEAD of your workspace -- you're in detached HEAD mode when you checkout a tag - when you checkout a branch and you commit

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: Right, the index is a very light-weight mechanism for giving the user power in deciding what to commit. I.e., more fine-grained control than choose

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: To be truly useful it has to be possible to [selectively]

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
sent too soon. On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: The staging area is another element of state on a check-out. It is one more thing that the developer must keep in mind. Better to minimize the amount of mind-space required for the VCS in order to leave as

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: I never need to diff the staging area to the HEAD. Only the workspace to the HEAD+staging area, which is what git diff does. Huh. I didn't not realize that was the default behavior for Git. It clearly would not work

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Richard Hipp on Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:34:31 -0400: It clearly would not work for me. As as an amateur user of Git, Git wasn't working for me---perhaps this is simply due to misunderstanding ``core'' features of Git. At any rate, thanks to Git I discovered Fossil and have been pleased

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Joel Bruick
Nico Williams wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Stephan Bealsgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Nico Williamsn...@cryptonector.com wrote: Mercurial too had heavy-duty branches only, then they added bookmarks that are very similar to git branches. Since a

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Scott Robison
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Joel Bruick j...@joelface.com wrote: I think Git is a great, powerful, and flexible tool that actually has a much simpler design than it initially appears. But to get to a place where you actually understand that design (and, thus, understand Git), takes

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Joel Bruick
Scott Robison wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Joel Bruick j...@joelface.com mailto:j...@joelface.com wrote: I think Git is a great, powerful, and flexible tool that actually has a much simpler design than it initially appears. But to get to a place where you actually

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Scott Robison
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Joel Bruick j...@joelface.com wrote: Consider it yours. Thanks. Final form: OH: To understand Git's design takes 99x more effort than 99% of software. Once you get to that point it's wonderful! // Too true! Curse the 140 character limit! :) -- Scott Robison

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com wrote: I really want to steal this in tweet form: To get to a place where you understand Git's design takes 99x more effort than 99% of software. Once you get to that point it's wonderful! Does that quote belong on this

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Scott Robison
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com wrote: I really want to steal this in tweet form: To get to a place where you understand Git's design takes 99x more effort than 99% of software. Once

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: I never need to diff the staging area to the HEAD. Only the workspace to the HEAD+staging area, which is what git diff does. Huh. I didn't not

Re: [fossil-users] Autosync retry?

2014-06-04 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Matt Welland on Thu, 29 May 2014 09:00:56 -0700: Retry on autosync would be a big help in my environment. Autosync failures due to overlapping access are a regular and annoying occurrence. I like Stephan's approach of 0, 1, N for off, on, multi-try Have you

Re: [fossil-users] Autosync retry?

2014-06-04 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said Martin Gagnon on Fri, 30 May 2014 05:55:58 -0400: Same for me, I always use autosync=1 together with the dont-push=1 setting for that. Look like an option got added by someone that didn't know about the other. The actually do serve different purposes. dont-push=1 prevents

Re: [fossil-users] Bookmarks (Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Joel Bruick
Scott Robison wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org mailto:d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com mailto:sc...@casaderobison.com wrote: I really want to steal this in tweet form: To

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Warren Young
On 6/4/2014 10:50, Richard Hipp wrote: The staging area complicates the interface. Perhaps you will add some of this to the Fossil vs Git wiki page. (Section 3.4?) ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org

[fossil-users] Outside contribution feature

2014-06-04 Thread Warren Young
As far as I can tell, Fossil offers two ways to allow outsiders to submit changes to an open source software project: 1. Give them Develop privs 2. Ask them to fossil diff and mail you a patch file In my open source project, I only give repo checkin privileges to contributors who have

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread Alysson Gonçalves de Azevedo
I started to use fossil just today, but let me participate too :) Everyday I have a list of tasks that I have to work on and when I finish, I like to separate the changes of each task by commit. To do that, I just open GUI, check the lines of the files that i want to commit. (Just like this

Re: [fossil-users] Index (was Re: git-fossil-git does not obtain the same commit hashes.)

2014-06-04 Thread B Harder
I've heard git allows this, and occasionally wished for it. As it stands currently, it's not possible with fossil. There is a degree of freedom in this regard using the fossil stash, though, which can be used with some file jigging to separate two (or more?) logical ideas that one wants committed