Fossil SCM
Add information on the Git-to-Fossil converter and a comparison article on Fossil and Git.
Commit
ae0628aa99a835f01fa06d5b4a41ecc2121bf419
Parent
e5a734a19a98269…
4 files changed
+101
+2
+11
+7
+101
| --- a/www/fossil-v-git.wiki | ||
| +++ b/www/fossil-v-git.wiki | ||
| @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ | ||
| 1 | +,h3> | |
| 2 | + | |
| 3 | +Git provides file versioning services only, whereas Fossil adds an | |
| 4 | +integrated [./wikitheory.wiki | wiki], | |
| 5 | +[./bugtheory.wiki | ticketisg & bug trackpers. Instead, all of the developers work together cooperatively | |
| 6 | +and the her cooperatively | |
| 7 | +and the changes stay integrated naturally. | |
| 8 | + | |
| 9 | +So to a first approxima y. | |
| 10 | + | |
| 11 | +So to a first approximation, branches in Git are developer-centric whereas | |
| 12 | +branches in Fossil are feature-centric. | |
| 13 | + | |
| 14 | +The Git approach scales much better for large projects like the Linux | |
| 15 | +kernel with thousands of contributors who in many cases don't even know | |
| 16 | +each other's names. The integrators serve a gatekeeper role to help keep | |
| 17 | +undesirable code out of the official Linux source tree. On the other hand, | |
| 18 | +not many projects are as big or as loosely organized as the Linux kernel. | |
| 19 | +Most projects have a small team of developers who all know each other | |
| 20 | +well and trust eacHuge communityes file versioning services only, whereas Fossil adds an | |
| 21 | +integrated [./wikitheory.wiki | wiki], | |
| 22 | +[./bugtheory.wiki | ticketing & bug trackpers. Instead, all of the developers work together cooperatively | |
| 23 | +and the changes stay integrated naturally. | |
| 24 | + | |
| 25 | +So to a first approxima y. | |
| 26 | + | |
| 27 | +So to a first approximation, branches in Git are developer-centric whereas | |
| 28 | +brancentric. | |
| 29 | + | |
| 30 | +The Git approach scales much better for large projects like the Linux | |
| 31 | +kernel with thousands of contributors who in many cases don't even know | |
| 32 | +each other's names. The integrators serve a gatekeeper role to help keep | |
| 33 | +undesirable code out of the official Linux source tree. On the other hand, | |
| 34 | +not many projects are as big or as loosely organizitzed as the Linux kernel. | |
| 35 | +Most projects have a small team of developers who all know each other | |
| 36 | +well and trust each other, and who enjoy working together collaboratively | |
| 37 | +without the overhead ing Modelators. | |
| 38 | + | |
| 39 | +Onesupports a sharded source tree, whereas Fossil wants all all | |
| 40 | +syncing repositories to carry all information. Git allows individual | |
| 41 | +developers to maintain multiple branches on their local repository | |
| 42 | +and then selectively push only one or two branches to higher level | |
| 43 | +developers. Fossil alsoioning services local branches, but Fossil | |
| 44 | +tends to encourage sharing everything, not just onproxima y. | |
| 45 | + | |
| 46 | +So to a first approximation, branches in Git are devel, since Linus doesn't reallyuch better for large projects like the Linux | |
| 47 | +kernel with thousands of contributors who in many cases don't even know | |
| 48 | +each other's names. The integrators serve a gatekeeper role to help keep | |
| 49 | +undesirable code out of the oFossil encourages a tight-knit, smaller, and more closely | |
| 50 | +cooperating developer community where all participants share all | |
| 51 | +of their code all of the time. | |
| 52 | + | |
| 53 | +The prototypical Git development model is that each developer maintains | |
| 54 | +their own branch and the various changes from each developer are later | |
| 55 | +merged into a master branch by an integrator. The prototypical Fossil | |
| 56 | +development model is that and are part of the collaborate on the same | |
| 57 | +branch at the same time. | |
| 58 | + | |
| 59 | +So in other words, Git promotes a model where individual developers | |
| 60 | +keep a subset of the branches of a project (sharding) whereas Fossil | |
| 61 | +promotes every developer having a complete copy of all branches | |
| 62 | +(replicating)ses "<tt>rebase</tt>"</td><td>Immutable</td></tr> | |
| 63 | +<tr><td>GPL</td><td>BSD</td></tr> | |
| 64 | +</table></blockquote> | |
| 65 | + | |
| 66 | +<h2>3.0 Discussion</h2> | |
| 67 | + | |
| 68 | +<h3>3.1 Feature Set</h3> | |
| 69 | + | |
| 70 | +Git provides file versioning services only, whereas Fossil adds an | |
| 71 | +integrated [./wikitheor<tt>fossil ui</tt>kitheory.wiki | wiki], | |
| 72 | +[./bugtheory.wiki | ticketing & bug tracking], | |
| 73 | +[./embeddeddoc.wiki | embedded documentation], and | |
| 74 | +[./event.wiki | Technical n ame branch. | |
| 75 | +Branches do not belong to individuals. All branches are read/write | |
| 76 | +accessible to all developers at all times. There is no need | |
| 77 | +for integrators to merge together changes from various independent | |
| 78 | +developers. Instead, all of the developers work together cooperatively | |
| 79 | +and the changes stay integrated naturally. | |
| 80 | + | |
| 81 | +So to a first approxima y. | |
| 82 | + | |
| 83 | +So to a first approximation, branches in Git are developer-centric whereas | |
| 84 | +branches in Fossil are feature-centric. | |
| 85 | + | |
| 86 | +The Git approacfor you the product will worko you, then you should choose Git. | |
| 87 | + | |
| 88 | +Fossil is clearly the "road less traveled": | |
| 89 | + | |
| 90 | +<blockquote> | |
| 91 | +Two roads diverged in a wood, and I —<br> | |
| 92 | +I took the one attention from the l>- Robert Frost, <i>The Road Not Taken</i>, 1916</small> | |
| 93 | +</blockquote> | |
| 94 | +</i></blockquote> | |
| 95 | + | |
| 96 | +Among the advantages of ing | |
| 97 | +<small>- Robert Frost, <i>The Road Not Taken</i>, 1916</small> | |
| 98 | +</blockquote> | |
| 99 | +</i></blockquote> | |
| 100 | + | |
| 101 | +Among the advantages of ing678 |
| --- a/www/fossil-v-git.wiki | |
| +++ b/www/fossil-v-git.wiki | |
| @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ | |
| --- a/www/fossil-v-git.wiki | |
| +++ b/www/fossil-v-git.wiki | |
| @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ | |
| 1 | ,h3> |
| 2 | |
| 3 | Git provides file versioning services only, whereas Fossil adds an |
| 4 | integrated [./wikitheory.wiki | wiki], |
| 5 | [./bugtheory.wiki | ticketisg & bug trackpers. Instead, all of the developers work together cooperatively |
| 6 | and the her cooperatively |
| 7 | and the changes stay integrated naturally. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | So to a first approxima y. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | So to a first approximation, branches in Git are developer-centric whereas |
| 12 | branches in Fossil are feature-centric. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | The Git approach scales much better for large projects like the Linux |
| 15 | kernel with thousands of contributors who in many cases don't even know |
| 16 | each other's names. The integrators serve a gatekeeper role to help keep |
| 17 | undesirable code out of the official Linux source tree. On the other hand, |
| 18 | not many projects are as big or as loosely organized as the Linux kernel. |
| 19 | Most projects have a small team of developers who all know each other |
| 20 | well and trust eacHuge communityes file versioning services only, whereas Fossil adds an |
| 21 | integrated [./wikitheory.wiki | wiki], |
| 22 | [./bugtheory.wiki | ticketing & bug trackpers. Instead, all of the developers work together cooperatively |
| 23 | and the changes stay integrated naturally. |
| 24 | |
| 25 | So to a first approxima y. |
| 26 | |
| 27 | So to a first approximation, branches in Git are developer-centric whereas |
| 28 | brancentric. |
| 29 | |
| 30 | The Git approach scales much better for large projects like the Linux |
| 31 | kernel with thousands of contributors who in many cases don't even know |
| 32 | each other's names. The integrators serve a gatekeeper role to help keep |
| 33 | undesirable code out of the official Linux source tree. On the other hand, |
| 34 | not many projects are as big or as loosely organizitzed as the Linux kernel. |
| 35 | Most projects have a small team of developers who all know each other |
| 36 | well and trust each other, and who enjoy working together collaboratively |
| 37 | without the overhead ing Modelators. |
| 38 | |
| 39 | Onesupports a sharded source tree, whereas Fossil wants all all |
| 40 | syncing repositories to carry all information. Git allows individual |
| 41 | developers to maintain multiple branches on their local repository |
| 42 | and then selectively push only one or two branches to higher level |
| 43 | developers. Fossil alsoioning services local branches, but Fossil |
| 44 | tends to encourage sharing everything, not just onproxima y. |
| 45 | |
| 46 | So to a first approximation, branches in Git are devel, since Linus doesn't reallyuch better for large projects like the Linux |
| 47 | kernel with thousands of contributors who in many cases don't even know |
| 48 | each other's names. The integrators serve a gatekeeper role to help keep |
| 49 | undesirable code out of the oFossil encourages a tight-knit, smaller, and more closely |
| 50 | cooperating developer community where all participants share all |
| 51 | of their code all of the time. |
| 52 | |
| 53 | The prototypical Git development model is that each developer maintains |
| 54 | their own branch and the various changes from each developer are later |
| 55 | merged into a master branch by an integrator. The prototypical Fossil |
| 56 | development model is that and are part of the collaborate on the same |
| 57 | branch at the same time. |
| 58 | |
| 59 | So in other words, Git promotes a model where individual developers |
| 60 | keep a subset of the branches of a project (sharding) whereas Fossil |
| 61 | promotes every developer having a complete copy of all branches |
| 62 | (replicating)ses "<tt>rebase</tt>"</td><td>Immutable</td></tr> |
| 63 | <tr><td>GPL</td><td>BSD</td></tr> |
| 64 | </table></blockquote> |
| 65 | |
| 66 | <h2>3.0 Discussion</h2> |
| 67 | |
| 68 | <h3>3.1 Feature Set</h3> |
| 69 | |
| 70 | Git provides file versioning services only, whereas Fossil adds an |
| 71 | integrated [./wikitheor<tt>fossil ui</tt>kitheory.wiki | wiki], |
| 72 | [./bugtheory.wiki | ticketing & bug tracking], |
| 73 | [./embeddeddoc.wiki | embedded documentation], and |
| 74 | [./event.wiki | Technical n ame branch. |
| 75 | Branches do not belong to individuals. All branches are read/write |
| 76 | accessible to all developers at all times. There is no need |
| 77 | for integrators to merge together changes from various independent |
| 78 | developers. Instead, all of the developers work together cooperatively |
| 79 | and the changes stay integrated naturally. |
| 80 | |
| 81 | So to a first approxima y. |
| 82 | |
| 83 | So to a first approximation, branches in Git are developer-centric whereas |
| 84 | branches in Fossil are feature-centric. |
| 85 | |
| 86 | The Git approacfor you the product will worko you, then you should choose Git. |
| 87 | |
| 88 | Fossil is clearly the "road less traveled": |
| 89 | |
| 90 | <blockquote> |
| 91 | Two roads diverged in a wood, and I —<br> |
| 92 | I took the one attention from the l>- Robert Frost, <i>The Road Not Taken</i>, 1916</small> |
| 93 | </blockquote> |
| 94 | </i></blockquote> |
| 95 | |
| 96 | Among the advantages of ing |
| 97 | <small>- Robert Frost, <i>The Road Not Taken</i>, 1916</small> |
| 98 | </blockquote> |
| 99 | </i></blockquote> |
| 100 | |
| 101 | Among the advantages of ing678 |
+2
| --- www/index.wiki | ||
| +++ www/index.wiki | ||
| @@ -131,10 +131,12 @@ | ||
| 131 | 131 | to configure the ticketing subsystem. |
| 132 | 132 | * A free hosting server for Fossil repositories is available at |
| 133 | 133 | [http://chiselapp.com/]. |
| 134 | 134 | * How to [./server.wiki | set up a server] for your repository. |
| 135 | 135 | * Customizing the [./custom_ticket.wiki | ticket system]. |
| 136 | + * [./inout.wiki | Import and export] from and to Git. | |
| 137 | + * [./fossil-v-git.wiki | Fossil versus Git]. | |
| 136 | 138 | |
| 137 | 139 | <h3>Links For Fossil Developer:</h3> |
| 138 | 140 | |
| 139 | 141 | * [./theory1.wiki | Thoughts On The Design Of Fossil]. |
| 140 | 142 | * [./pop.wiki | Principles Of Operation] |
| 141 | 143 | |
| 142 | 144 | ADDED www/inout.wiki |
| --- www/index.wiki | |
| +++ www/index.wiki | |
| @@ -131,10 +131,12 @@ | |
| 131 | to configure the ticketing subsystem. |
| 132 | * A free hosting server for Fossil repositories is available at |
| 133 | [http://chiselapp.com/]. |
| 134 | * How to [./server.wiki | set up a server] for your repository. |
| 135 | * Customizing the [./custom_ticket.wiki | ticket system]. |
| 136 | |
| 137 | <h3>Links For Fossil Developer:</h3> |
| 138 | |
| 139 | * [./theory1.wiki | Thoughts On The Design Of Fossil]. |
| 140 | * [./pop.wiki | Principles Of Operation] |
| 141 | |
| 142 | DDED www/inout.wiki |
| --- www/index.wiki | |
| +++ www/index.wiki | |
| @@ -131,10 +131,12 @@ | |
| 131 | to configure the ticketing subsystem. |
| 132 | * A free hosting server for Fossil repositories is available at |
| 133 | [http://chiselapp.com/]. |
| 134 | * How to [./server.wiki | set up a server] for your repository. |
| 135 | * Customizing the [./custom_ticket.wiki | ticket system]. |
| 136 | * [./inout.wiki | Import and export] from and to Git. |
| 137 | * [./fossil-v-git.wiki | Fossil versus Git]. |
| 138 | |
| 139 | <h3>Links For Fossil Developer:</h3> |
| 140 | |
| 141 | * [./theory1.wiki | Thoughts On The Design Of Fossil]. |
| 142 | * [./pop.wiki | Principles Of Operation] |
| 143 | |
| 144 | DDED www/inout.wiki |
+11
| --- a/www/inout.wiki | ||
| +++ b/www/inout.wiki | ||
| @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | ||
| 1 | +brun commands like In other words, simplyof the "git fast" command. namebr un commands like In other words, simplyof the "git fast" command. name other words, simplyof the "git fast" command. name | |
| 2 | + | |
| 3 | +An anonymous user sends this comment: | |
| 4 | + | |
| 5 | +<blockquote> | |
| 6 | +The main Fossil branch is called "trunk", while the main git branch is | |
| 7 | +called "master"→fter you've exported your FOSSIL repo to git, you won't | |
| 8 | +see any files and gitk will complain about a missing "HEAD". Yo | |
| 9 | +resolve this problem by merging "trunk" with "master" | |
| 10 | +(first verify using git status that you are on the "master" branch): | |
| 11 | +<tt>git2nR" commandn |
| --- a/www/inout.wiki | |
| +++ b/www/inout.wiki | |
| @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | |
| --- a/www/inout.wiki | |
| +++ b/www/inout.wiki | |
| @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | |
| 1 | brun commands like In other words, simplyof the "git fast" command. namebr un commands like In other words, simplyof the "git fast" command. name other words, simplyof the "git fast" command. name |
| 2 | |
| 3 | An anonymous user sends this comment: |
| 4 | |
| 5 | <blockquote> |
| 6 | The main Fossil branch is called "trunk", while the main git branch is |
| 7 | called "master"→fter you've exported your FOSSIL repo to git, you won't |
| 8 | see any files and gitk will complain about a missing "HEAD". Yo |
| 9 | resolve this problem by merging "trunk" with "master" |
| 10 | (first verify using git status that you are on the "master" branch): |
| 11 | <tt>git2nR" commandn |
+7
| --- www/quickstart.wiki | ||
| +++ www/quickstart.wiki | ||
| @@ -82,10 +82,17 @@ | ||
| 82 | 82 | is not required.</p> |
| 83 | 83 | |
| 84 | 84 | <p>Note: If you are behind a restrictive firewall, you might need |
| 85 | 85 | to <a href="#proxy">specify an HTTP proxy</a> to use.</p> |
| 86 | 86 | |
| 87 | +</blockquote><h2>Importing From Another Version Control System</h2><blockquote> | |
| 88 | + | |
| 89 | + <p>Rather than start a new project, or clone an existing Fossil project, | |
| 90 | + you might prefer to | |
| 91 | + <a href="./inout.wiki">import an existing Git project</a> | |
| 92 | + into Fossil. | |
| 93 | + | |
| 87 | 94 | </blockquote><h2>Checking Out A Local Tree</h2><blockquote> |
| 88 | 95 | |
| 89 | 96 | <p>To work on a project in fossil, you need to check out a local |
| 90 | 97 | copy of the source tree. Create the directory you want to be |
| 91 | 98 | the root of your tree and cd into that directory. Then |
| 92 | 99 |
| --- www/quickstart.wiki | |
| +++ www/quickstart.wiki | |
| @@ -82,10 +82,17 @@ | |
| 82 | is not required.</p> |
| 83 | |
| 84 | <p>Note: If you are behind a restrictive firewall, you might need |
| 85 | to <a href="#proxy">specify an HTTP proxy</a> to use.</p> |
| 86 | |
| 87 | </blockquote><h2>Checking Out A Local Tree</h2><blockquote> |
| 88 | |
| 89 | <p>To work on a project in fossil, you need to check out a local |
| 90 | copy of the source tree. Create the directory you want to be |
| 91 | the root of your tree and cd into that directory. Then |
| 92 |
| --- www/quickstart.wiki | |
| +++ www/quickstart.wiki | |
| @@ -82,10 +82,17 @@ | |
| 82 | is not required.</p> |
| 83 | |
| 84 | <p>Note: If you are behind a restrictive firewall, you might need |
| 85 | to <a href="#proxy">specify an HTTP proxy</a> to use.</p> |
| 86 | |
| 87 | </blockquote><h2>Importing From Another Version Control System</h2><blockquote> |
| 88 | |
| 89 | <p>Rather than start a new project, or clone an existing Fossil project, |
| 90 | you might prefer to |
| 91 | <a href="./inout.wiki">import an existing Git project</a> |
| 92 | into Fossil. |
| 93 | |
| 94 | </blockquote><h2>Checking Out A Local Tree</h2><blockquote> |
| 95 | |
| 96 | <p>To work on a project in fossil, you need to check out a local |
| 97 | copy of the source tree. Create the directory you want to be |
| 98 | the root of your tree and cd into that directory. Then |
| 99 |