2014-05-15 6:46 GMT+02:00 Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org:
I did some minimal testing to confirm that the previously identified
problems no longer exist. I also tried cloning the empty repository and
that worked both with old and the no-initial-commit version. Of course I
was
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 6:46 AM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.orgwrote:
...that worked both with old and the no-initial-commit version. Of course I
was unable to commit with old versions (unless the particular bug fixed
by [f7d9413ccf] was triggered). I don't imagine that a newly
2014-05-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com:
It's funny you say that because in libfossil i've had to go back and
reexamine my 0 semantics, and let them be legal (empty repo) in some cases,
but stand for the current checkout in others (where 0 otherwise makes no
sense).
Thus said Jan Nijtmans on Wed, 14 May 2014 12:11:42 +0200:
Anyway, I would like to execute the same plan (merge branch
no-initial-commit to trunk) once more. If anyone thinks this is a
bad idea (maybe because another bug prevents us to do that), I'm all
ears.
I did some
2014-05-01 12:28 GMT+02:00 Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com:
No objections, but some comments...
- libfossil has been using repos without an initial commit since last
summer. AFAIK there are no more open assertions related to that, but every
now and then i'll run into a case which expects
Thus said Jan Nijtmans on Thu, 08 May 2014 12:29:27 +0200:
Well, I went ahead, and merged the proposed change to trunk.
This means that the initial empty commit is no longer created by
surprise, but it's only a change of the default behavior: When
specifying
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Jan Nijtmans jan.nijtm...@gmail.comwrote:
tests to assure that. Actually, fossil cannot do very much when dealing
with an empty repository. Merging??? against what branch
It's funny you say that because in libfossil i've had to go back and
reexamine my 0
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 02:42:58PM -0500, Andy Goth wrote:
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, I have to do [fossil
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 repository
on chiselapp with the same project-id as my repository.
Did you use the Upload Repository feature?
--
Too big. Chiselapp has an 8MB upload size limit.
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Andy Goth andrew.m.g...@gmail.com 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
2014-05-01 7:24 GMT+02:00 Gerald Gutierrez gerald.gutier...@gmail.com:
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
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Jan Nijtmans jan.nijtm...@gmail.comwrote:
I think it would be better if fossil didn't create the initial empty
commit any more:
http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/f2c8b4f375
That would avoid the confusion, and it works fine!
Any objections merging
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
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
Talked with Roy on the Tcler's chat.
[12:54]rkeeneaku, The 8MB limit is incorrect -- it's really
2GB (IIRC) but the page doesn't say that
[12:55]rkeeneThere 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
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 jan.nijtm...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-05-01 7:24 GMT+02:00 Gerald Gutierrez
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 repository on
chiselapp with the same project-id as my repository.
I then pushed my local repository to the chiselapp repository and then
looked at the timeline and
17 matches
Mail list logo
