On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:10:17PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:50:52PM +0100, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 08:33:29PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
Having incomplete changes in the tree is bad for things like bisect.
It shouldn't
To this point all my fossil usage is mostly-solo, whereas I've been
using git on small teams. So when I said I miss it from git, I more
properly meant it really comes in handy in my usage of git, and I know
fossil doesn't have it, and if I were using fossil in the same contexts
as I'm using
Hi,
I'll say a few things since I was one of those who said
git stash in a post :)
git stash, I think, is not a necessity but a convenience.
There is nothing that you can do with git stash that you
can't do with branches.
Scenario (1): git-pull (the equivalent of fossil update in this
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:09:58PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.comwrote:
Scenario (2): You are in the middle of a big change when a minor bug report
comes in. You stash your incomplete change, fix the minor bug, then pop
your
On Dec 15, 2010, at 16:53 , Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:09:58PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.comwrote:
Scenario (2): You are in the middle of a big change when a minor bug report
comes in. You stash
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 05:14:08PM +0100, Remigiusz Modrzejewski wrote:
1) work freely on my big change, committing atomic changes
fl commit --private
fl commit --private
[...]
fl commit --private
2) prepare to make a real commit
fl up trunk
fl merge private
3) make sure everything works
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:09:58PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.com
wrote:
Scenario (2): You are in the middle of a big change when a minor
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:55:27PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:09:58PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.com
wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 08:33:29PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:55:27PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:09:58PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:50:52PM +0100, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 08:33:29PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
Having incomplete changes in the tree is bad for things like bisect.
It shouldn't be forced. The big issue here is that merging changes the
working
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.comwrote:
It would be nice to have something like `git stash`, too. Probably the
biggest thing I miss from git.
I've been reading up on git-stash to see if Fossil needs a similar feature.
So far I don't see the need, since
On Tue, 14 Dec 2010 20:09:58 -05 wrote:
Richard So in summary - Fossil appears to already do everything that
Richard git-stash does and do it at least as easily as git-stash.
Richard Furthermore, I think for the sake of usability that is
Richard important to keep Fossil as simple as possible and
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:09:58PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joshua Paine jos...@letterblock.comwrote:
It would be nice to have something like `git stash`, too. Probably the
biggest thing I miss from git.
I've been reading up on git-stash to see if
13 matches
Mail list logo
