Fossil SCM • Hacker News Board

Re: Fossil SCM

#11

Post by BeetleB » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:33 PM UTC

jjirsa wrote: post #3

No/manual rebase sounds awful

Genuinely curious: Why do you need rebasing?

I'm mostly a mercurial person, where doing a rebase is highly discouraged and nontrivial. After all these years on mercurial, I've never found a need to do it. Why is it so popular amongst git users?

Re: Fossil SCM

#12

Post by spraak » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:36 PM UTC

pestaa wrote: post #2

GitLab contributors, please take note. Fossil's UI is very fast and the navigation is intuitive and discoverable. I know it's on the roadmap, but it is so often an afterthought.

I couldn't find any screenshots on the site, can you share any?

Re: Fossil SCM

#13

Post by simplehuman » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:37 PM UTC

Surprised to see no LDAP support.

http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/tktview?name=ec667f74f8

Re: Fossil SCM

#14

Post by Rexxar » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:37 PM UTC

The previous submission of the link to fossil-scm.org ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12673229) has some interesting comments from the creator.

Re: Fossil SCM

#15

Post by spraak » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:38 PM UTC

BeetleB wrote: post #11

jjirsa wrote: post #3

No/manual rebase sounds awful

Genuinely curious: Why do you need rebasing? I'm mostly a mercurial person, where doing a rebase is highly discouraged and nontrivial. After all these years on mercurial, I've never found a need to do it. Why is it so popular amongst git users?

Usually as a way to ensure a working branch stays up to date with master/another branch, so there aren't merge conflicts. Or if there are merge conflicts, to resolve them.

Re: Fossil SCM

#16

Post by alvil » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:38 PM UTC

Fossil is running on https://www.sqlite.org/docsrc/artifact/c3a749450a2f0d73 .. another lovely piece of software .. like it

Re: Fossil SCM

#17

Post by detaro » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:38 PM UTC

spraak wrote: post #12

pestaa wrote: post #2

GitLab contributors, please take note. Fossil's UI is very fast and the navigation is intuitive and discoverable. I know it's on the roadmap, but it is so often an afterthought.

I couldn't find any screenshots on the site, can you share any?

Just click the link above, the entire site is Fossils interface.

Re: Fossil SCM

#18

Post by jdmichal » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:38 PM UTC

BeetleB wrote: post #11

jjirsa wrote: post #3

No/manual rebase sounds awful

Genuinely curious: Why do you need rebasing? I'm mostly a mercurial person, where doing a rebase is highly discouraged and nontrivial. After all these years on mercurial, I've never found a need to do it. Why is it so popular amongst git users?

Rebasing gives you a linear history instead of the diamonds non-rebased branching and merging gives you. I mean, that's the technical reason, anyway.

Re: Fossil SCM

#19

Post by mixmastamyk » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:38 PM UTC

maxpert wrote: post #10

cmrx64 wrote: post #5

Fossil is the SCM I always wish I were using, but for the benefit of external collaborators, I stick with Git and GitLab (previously, GitHub). Fossil is a lovely, small piece of software that does exactly what I want in a nice and simple way. It's fast and uses SQLite for everything, making it easy to programmatically extend it and munge its internal data.

SQLite usage makes me wonder how will it behave over time with millions of commits. Also makes me wonder how will it handle distribution.

Indeed, what are the consequences of that choice, vs. git and hg?

Re: Fossil SCM

#20

Post by ubercore » Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 4:38 PM UTC

spraak wrote: post #12

pestaa wrote: post #2

GitLab contributors, please take note. Fossil's UI is very fast and the navigation is intuitive and discoverable. I know it's on the roadmap, but it is so often an afterthought.

I couldn't find any screenshots on the site, can you share any?

I believe the site itself is running an instance of Fossil?