Re: [fossil-users] Initial empty checkin?

[Dingyuan Wang]

Fossil import now has a bug that it makes a repo with SHA3 hashes, but
can't do incremental updates because of the SHA3 hashes. My workaround
is to first `fossil new --sha1` and then import. The initial empty
checkin is annoying for importing.

2017-08-17 18:32, Stephan Beal:
> Fwiw: My recollection and opinion are the same.
> 
> - stephan
> Sent from a mobile device, possibly from bed. Please excuse brevity,
> typos, and top-posting.
> 
> On Aug 17, 2017 07:35, "Andy Bradford"  > wrote:
> 
> Thus said Andy Goth on Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:56 -0500:
> 
> > What of this old thread? Are  the issues it discusses still pertinent,
> > or have they been resolved?
> 
> I believe  all the  relevant issues were  actually resolved,  however, I
> think it  was still unfavorable  given the  time that was  available for
> testing the changes before release.
> 
> Personally,  I would  be  in  favor of  retaining  the  old behavior  by
> default,  but allowing  a command  line option  to ``fossil  init'' that
> would initialize a new repository without it.
> 
> Andy
> --
> TAI64 timestamp: 400059952b4d
> 
> 
> ___
> 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 mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] Initial empty checkin?

[Stephan Beal]

Fwiw: My recollection and opinion are the same.

- stephan
Sent from a mobile device, possibly from bed. Please excuse brevity, typos,
and top-posting.

On Aug 17, 2017 07:35, "Andy Bradford"  wrote:

> Thus said Andy Goth on Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:56 -0500:
>
> > What of this old thread? Are  the issues it discusses still pertinent,
> > or have they been resolved?
>
> I believe  all the  relevant issues were  actually resolved,  however, I
> think it  was still unfavorable  given the  time that was  available for
> testing the changes before release.
>
> Personally,  I would  be  in  favor of  retaining  the  old behavior  by
> default,  but allowing  a command  line option  to ``fossil  init'' that
> would initialize a new repository without it.
>
> Andy
> --
> TAI64 timestamp: 400059952b4d
>
>
> ___
> 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] Initial empty checkin?

[Andy Bradford]

Thus said Andy Goth on Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:56 -0500:

> What of this old thread? Are  the issues it discusses still pertinent,
> or have they been resolved?

I believe  all the  relevant issues were  actually resolved,  however, I
think it  was still unfavorable  given the  time that was  available for
testing the changes before release.

Personally,  I would  be  in  favor of  retaining  the  old behavior  by
default,  but allowing  a command  line option  to ``fossil  init'' that
would initialize a new repository without it.

Andy
-- 
TAI64 timestamp: 400059952b4d


___
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] Initial empty checkin?

[Andy Goth]

On 07/17/17 03:50, Jan Nijtmans wrote:

The patch below modifies Fossil not to create the initial empty
commit. (I always build Fossil with this patch). Everything works
fine without initial empty commit, the reason this was in Fossil is
just historical. Nowadays, there - indeed - is no reason any more
to create an empty initial commit, in my opinion is confuses
more than that it helps anything. Your mail tells me enough 


What of this old thread?  Are the issues it discusses still pertinent, 
or have they been resolved?


http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg19845.html
___
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] Initial empty checkin?

[Jan Nijtmans]

2017-07-17 6:33 GMT+02:00 Damien Sykes-Lindley:
> Hi there,
> Is there a way of removing or preventing the creation of the “initial empty
> checkin”? I personally can’t see any practical uses for that, unless the
> implementation somehow requires it.
> Also, this checkin seems to be automatically sent to trunk. Is there any way
> of renaming this branch, either on the creation of the repository or later
> on?
> Thanks.
> Damien.

Hi Damien,

The patch below modifies Fossil not to create the initial empty
commit. (I always build Fossil with this patch). Everything works
fine without initial empty commit, the reason this was in Fossil is
just historical. Nowadays, there - indeed - is no reason any more
to create an empty initial commit, in my opinion is confuses
more than that it helps anything. Your mail tells me enough 

If you want to get rid of an - already created - initial commit, you
can just "purge" it. Normally you need to be careful purging
anything, but in this case it will just work fine. If there already
were follow-up commits, that's no problem: the next commit
will become the new initial commit. If a fossil repository doesn't
have any commits, the first commit you do after that will
become the new initial commit.

Regards,
Jan Nijtmans

 Index: src/db.c
==
--- src/db.c
+++ src/db.c
@@ -1997,11 +1997,10 @@
   db_begin_transaction();
   if( bUseSha1 ){
 g.eHashPolicy = HPOLICY_SHA1;
 db_set_int("hash-policy", HPOLICY_SHA1, 0);
   }
-  if( zDate==0 ) zDate = "now";
   db_initial_setup(zTemplate, zDate, zDefaultUser);
   db_end_transaction(0);
   if( zTemplate ) db_detach("settingSrc");
   fossil_print("project-id: %s\n", db_get("project-code", 0));
   fossil_print("server-id:  %s\n", db_get("server-code", 0));
Index: src/main.c
==
--- src/main.c
+++ src/main.c
@@ -2027,11 +2027,11 @@
 db_create_repository(zRepo);
 db_open_repository(zRepo);
 db_begin_transaction();
 g.eHashPolicy = HPOLICY_AUTO;
 db_set_int("hash-policy", HPOLICY_AUTO, 0);
-db_initial_setup(0, "now", g.zLogin);
+db_initial_setup(0, 0, g.zLogin);
 db_end_transaction(0);
 fossil_print("project-id: %s\n", db_get("project-code", 0));
 fossil_print("server-id:  %s\n", db_get("server-code", 0));
 zPassword = db_text(0, "SELECT pw FROM user WHERE login=%Q", g.zLogin);
 fossil_print("admin-user: %s (initial password is \"%s\")\n",
___
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] Initial empty checkin?

[Stephan Beal]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Damien Sykes-Lindley <
dam...@dcpendleton.plus.com> wrote:

> Hi there,
> Is there a way of removing or preventing the creation of the “initial
> empty checkin”? I personally can’t see any practical uses for that, unless
> the implementation somehow requires it.
>

Historically, the implementation needed it to "seed" the db with starting
point for db record IDs. At one point there was an option to create a new
repo without that (as opposed to removing a commit - that has never been
implemented), but that feature seems to have been removed in the meantime
(i don't recall if that feature was ever in the trunk, but i know it was
implemented about 3 or 4 years ago).

Completely removing a commit can't be done in fossil except,
_hypothetically_, by removing every commit, starting at the newest one,
which leads to that commit (think of it as a stack of commits, where one
could "pop off" each commit in that stack). That's hypothetically possible,
but it's never been implemented.

Also, this checkin seems to be automatically sent to trunk. Is there any
> way of renaming this branch, either on the creation of the repository or
> later on?
>

Yes:

fossil ui
visit the timeline
visit the checkin
see the "Other Links" line and click on the "edit" link
see the "Branching" line: change the name of the branch to whatever you
like, then click the Apply Changes button.

-- 
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

[fossil-users] Initial empty checkin?

[Damien Sykes-Lindley]

Hi there,
Is there a way of removing or preventing the creation of the “initial empty 
checkin”? I personally can’t see any practical uses for that, unless the 
implementation somehow requires it.
Also, this checkin seems to be automatically sent to trunk. Is there any way of 
renaming this branch, either on the creation of the repository or later on?
Thanks.
Damien.
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users