Move to Github!!?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
43 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Move to Github!!?

Shekhar Reddy
Hi,

Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to GitHub? I
think that would reach more number of people there.

Regards
Shekhar
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

J. King-3
SQLite source is managed in a Fossil (not Git)  repository, which is software itself designed by Dr. Hipp and based on SQLite. GitHub would be an entirely inappropriate venue.

SQLite is also not open source software in the conventional sense. SQLite is written by a small team of people, and outside contributions are far less common than in most open source software.

On December 25, 2017 1:19:18 PM EST, Shekhar Reddy <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to GitHub?
>I
>think that would reach more number of people there.
>
>Regards
>Shekhar
>_______________________________________________
>sqlite-users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Stephen Chrzanowski
As stated, SQLite is managed by Fossil, and Fossil is managed by SQLite.
(I think it was) Dr Hipp that stated that "Fossil is eating its own dog
food".

https://www.google.ca/search?q=eating+your+own+dog+food&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=SENBWvCGOs6fXo7ynMAJ

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/eatyourowndogfood.asp


On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 1:24 PM, J. King <[hidden email]> wrote:

> SQLite source is managed in a Fossil (not Git)  repository, which is
> software itself designed by Dr. Hipp and based on SQLite. GitHub would be
> an entirely inappropriate venue.
>
> SQLite is also not open source software in the conventional sense. SQLite
> is written by a small team of people, and outside contributions are far
> less common than in most open source software.
>
> On December 25, 2017 1:19:18 PM EST, Shekhar Reddy <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to GitHub?
> >I
> >think that would reach more number of people there.
> >
> >Regards
> >Shekhar
> >_______________________________________________
> >sqlite-users mailing list
> >[hidden email]
> >http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Keith Medcalf
In reply to this post by Shekhar Reddy

Heavens forbid!

---
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.


>-----Original Message-----
>From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-
>[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Shekhar Reddy
>Sent: Monday, 25 December, 2017 11:19
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: [sqlite] Move to Github!!?
>
>Hi,
>
>Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to
>GitHub? I
>think that would reach more number of people there.
>
>Regards
>Shekhar
>_______________________________________________
>sqlite-users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users



_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Jungle Boogie
In reply to this post by Shekhar Reddy
On Mon 25 Dec 2017 11:49 PM, Shekhar Reddy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to GitHub? I
> think that would reach more number of people there.
>

So are you saying it would be the most used in the galaxy?
SQLite is the most used database engine in the world.[0]

[0] https://sqlite.org/about.html


> Regards
> Shekhar
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Jay Kreibich
In reply to this post by J. King-3

> On Dec 25, 2017, at 12:24 PM, J. King <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> SQLite source is managed in a Fossil (not Git)  repository, which is software itself designed by Dr. Hipp and based on SQLite. GitHub would be an entirely inappropriate venue.
>
> SQLite is also not open source software in the conventional sense. SQLite is written by a small team of people, and outside contributions are far less common than in most open source software.


Indeed.  The core SQLite source code is free (as in beer, as in freedom), but its development is carefully controlled by Hwaci, the company responsible for employing SQLite developers.  Hwaci also owns the trademark to the name SQLite. Hwaci has several products, including extensions such as the SQLite encryption extensions, that are NOT free (as in beer, nor as in freedom).  The testing system used for SQLite, which represents a source base several times larger than the SQLite core, is also completely private.  Hosting such systems on Github would require a subscription fee and, frankly, why should they bother?

   -j

_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

J Decker
On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Jay Kreibich <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> > On Dec 25, 2017, at 12:24 PM, J. King <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > SQLite source is managed in a Fossil (not Git)  repository, which is
> software itself designed by Dr. Hipp and based on SQLite. GitHub would be
> an entirely inappropriate venue.
> >
> > SQLite is also not open source software in the conventional sense.
> SQLite is written by a small team of people, and outside contributions are
> far less common than in most open source software.
>
>
> Indeed.  The core SQLite source code is free (as in beer, as in freedom),
> but its development is carefully controlled by Hwaci, the company
> responsible for employing SQLite developers.  Hwaci also owns the trademark
> to the name SQLite. Hwaci has several products, including extensions such
> as the SQLite encryption extensions, that are NOT free (as in beer, nor as
> in freedom).  The testing system used for SQLite, which represents a source
> base several times larger than the SQLite core, is also completely
> private.  Hosting such systems on Github would require a subscription fee
> and, frankly, why should they bother?
>
>
doesn't require a fee unless they want to amke it private.  It's not
private as it is (though it is a bit more work to track down how to get it).
They could still maintain strict control over merges as a public project.

I have a version on github I've been keeping up to date for the last month
or so...  https://github.com/d3x0r/sqlite3
<https://github.com/d3x0r/sqlite3/tree/master>  (And no, I don't plan to
maintain this forever; although it might end up that way)

Migrating the original fossil to github would be a lot of work to rebuild
the history in git format; plus they would lose color tagging on
branches...
Fossil is actually simpler to deal with since it's a single executable.


   -j
>
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Richard Hipp-3
In reply to this post by Shekhar Reddy
On 12/25/17, Shekhar Reddy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to GitHub? I
> think that would reach more number of people there.
>

There is a mirror of the SQLite repository on GitHub at
https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite (maintained by GitHub user "mackyle"
whom I do not know, but whose efforts I do appreciate).

SQLite uses a different version control system called Fossil.  See
https://www.fossil-scm.org/ for more information about Fossil.  Fossil
is superior to Git+GitHub in many respects.  You can easily see this
by doing a side-by-side comparison of the SQLite Fossil repository
against the GitHub mirror.

For example, here is the GitHub view of the "dbpage" branch of SQLite:

     https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/commits/dbpage

Compare the above against the equivalent Fossil view:

     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?p=dfdebd12bfc80b91

The Fossil view clearly shows that the head of "dbpage" is the merger
of two other branches, and Fossil shows clearly where the branch
diverged from trunk.  That information is very difficult to discern
from the GitHub view.

Fossil also has the ability to show the complete context of an
individual branch.  For the "dbpage" branch, the context is shown
here:

     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?r=dbpage

Note in particular that Fossil clearly shows that the "dbpage" branch
was ultimately merged back into trunk.  GitHub does not provide that
information, as far as I can tell.

The basic problem with Git (apart from its notoriously convoluted user
interface) is that it is based on a (bespoke) key/value database - the
"packfile".  Fossil, on the other hand, is based on the most widely
used relational database in the world.  This make information much
easier to extract from Fossil than from Git.  For example, given a
commit in Git (perhaps one reported by a customer or one found via
bisect) there is no easy way in Git to find out what comes next - what
commits were entered using your commit as a baseline.  Git shows
ancestors, but not descendants.  Fossil, on the other hand, easily
shows both descendants and ancestors of a check-in. You see this in
the "Context" section of any Fossil commit page, such as
https://www.sqlite.org/src/info/dfdebd12bfc80b91

The fact that Git/GitHub does not show the descendants of a commit is
a show-stopper for me.

Finally, the use of GitHub would create a reliance on an outside
company over which we have no influence.  The people who run GitHub
today seem like great folks.  But the company might be sold or fall
under new management tomorrow, and the friendly and open policies that
govern GitHub today might change in an instant.  Fossil, on the other
hand, is very simple to self-host on a $5/month VPS. (SQLite uses
https://www.linode.com/ for its main servers and
https://www.digitalocean.com for the https://www3.sqlite.org/ backup.
There are lots of others.)

So, given that Fossil is freer than Git (BSD vs. GPL), that Fossil
embodies all of the functionality of both Git and GitHub, that Fossil
is more capable than Git/GitHub, that Fossil has a friendly user
interface than Git, and that Fossil is very easy to self-host and thus
frees you of any dependencies on third-party companies, the question
becomes:

Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!

--
D. Richard Hipp
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Damien Sykes-Lindley
Hi,
This is a question I have asked myself many times (I.E. Git projects moving
to Fossil).
GitHub is well known and boasts over 74 million repositories, yet Fossil,
which both hosts and utilises one of the most well-known database systems in
the world, I doubt can count a thousand. Even the ChiselApp hosting platform
hosts a mere 360 public repositories, Hydra hosts 11, WanderingHorse hosts
23, outside of which lie Fossil itself, the Fossil book, SQLite and friends
(5 publicly accessible repositories in all), and TCL and friends (7
repositories), making a total of 408. Add SQLite private repositories, and
private repositories that I host, have access to or otherwise generally know
exist, and I come up with an estimate of roughly 470 repositories. Of course
this is not an accurate statistic since it may exclude more private
repositories, and definitely excludes any local repositories (I for one have
about a dozen Git repositories as Fossil repositories).
While I am making every attempt to try to persuade friends towards Fossil,
they are also choosing Git. Looks to me like the only people who seem to use
Fossil are those who are most associated with it, which is a real shame.
The only advantage I can see with GitHub is that it's the source code
Twitter equivalent. Everybody's repository is in one place. As long as you
know the username and repository name you know the full repository URL, and
you don't have to worry about server administration. With Fossil, if I
wanted to make it feel like github, I.E. address.tld/user/repo, I would have
to script it and serve it via a webserver rather than Fossil's own server,
two processes which I am not at all skilled enough, at least at the moment,
to undertake. To give you an example, I am currently having to run two
systems, one for my website and one for Fossil, so that they can both work
on port 80, because I know nothing about networking in order to understand
IP addresses, ports and connections in the way I'd need to get a server and
Fossil to run on port 80 on the same machine, nor do I know enough about
webservers to be able to get it to work with CGI. In fact I know so little
that I follow installation guides to the letter and have to do a complete
fresh server reset and reinstall from scratch when something goes wrong
because I haven't a clue how to fix it. If I'm to be totally honest at the
moment I'm even beginning to doubt my own software development skills.
If there were a Fossil-based github-like system, and both Fossil and the
hosting system were well promoted, Fossil may or may not become the norm.
Having said that, the advantage of Fossil over Git is that, thanks to the
webserver, you can easily look at your changes in a laid-out website, even
on your own machine. I've many a time found myself importing Git
repositories into Fossil just to look at the timeline. Plus, you don't have
to worry about complicated concepts like pull requests, synchronising forks
and submodules etc. Though it doesn't matter what VCS I use I always seem to
come across, and struggle with, the concept of branching and merging!
In any case, my incompetencies aside. People seem to be slowly moving away
from SourceForge in favour of GitHub. If only we could make the same
revolution with Fossil! Ironically when I first came across a site called
FossHub I actually thought that was an attempt to make a Fossil-based
GitHub. Seems that isn't the case after all.
Cheers.
Damien.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Hipp
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 1:10 PM
To: SQLite mailing list
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Move to Github!!?

On 12/25/17, Shekhar Reddy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to GitHub? I
> think that would reach more number of people there.
>

There is a mirror of the SQLite repository on GitHub at
https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite (maintained by GitHub user "mackyle"
whom I do not know, but whose efforts I do appreciate).

SQLite uses a different version control system called Fossil.  See
https://www.fossil-scm.org/ for more information about Fossil.  Fossil
is superior to Git+GitHub in many respects.  You can easily see this
by doing a side-by-side comparison of the SQLite Fossil repository
against the GitHub mirror.

For example, here is the GitHub view of the "dbpage" branch of SQLite:

     https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/commits/dbpage

Compare the above against the equivalent Fossil view:

     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?p=dfdebd12bfc80b91

The Fossil view clearly shows that the head of "dbpage" is the merger
of two other branches, and Fossil shows clearly where the branch
diverged from trunk.  That information is very difficult to discern
from the GitHub view.

Fossil also has the ability to show the complete context of an
individual branch.  For the "dbpage" branch, the context is shown
here:

     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?r=dbpage

Note in particular that Fossil clearly shows that the "dbpage" branch
was ultimately merged back into trunk.  GitHub does not provide that
information, as far as I can tell.

The basic problem with Git (apart from its notoriously convoluted user
interface) is that it is based on a (bespoke) key/value database - the
"packfile".  Fossil, on the other hand, is based on the most widely
used relational database in the world.  This make information much
easier to extract from Fossil than from Git.  For example, given a
commit in Git (perhaps one reported by a customer or one found via
bisect) there is no easy way in Git to find out what comes next - what
commits were entered using your commit as a baseline.  Git shows
ancestors, but not descendants.  Fossil, on the other hand, easily
shows both descendants and ancestors of a check-in. You see this in
the "Context" section of any Fossil commit page, such as
https://www.sqlite.org/src/info/dfdebd12bfc80b91

The fact that Git/GitHub does not show the descendants of a commit is
a show-stopper for me.

Finally, the use of GitHub would create a reliance on an outside
company over which we have no influence.  The people who run GitHub
today seem like great folks.  But the company might be sold or fall
under new management tomorrow, and the friendly and open policies that
govern GitHub today might change in an instant.  Fossil, on the other
hand, is very simple to self-host on a $5/month VPS. (SQLite uses
https://www.linode.com/ for its main servers and
https://www.digitalocean.com for the https://www3.sqlite.org/ backup.
There are lots of others.)

So, given that Fossil is freer than Git (BSD vs. GPL), that Fossil
embodies all of the functionality of both Git and GitHub, that Fossil
is more capable than Git/GitHub, that Fossil has a friendly user
interface than Git, and that Fossil is very easy to self-host and thus
frees you of any dependencies on third-party companies, the question
becomes:

Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!

--
D. Richard Hipp
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users 

_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

J. King-3
I use Git, but I'm not attached to it. I run my own publicly-accessible remote (using Gitea), but that would be completely replaceable with Fossil (which I am very impressed by).

What's not so easy to replace is the Git integration in my editor (Visual Studio Code) which allows me to easily perform basic operation like commit, push, pull, and rebase.

Even just to the ability to review diffs and perform checkins in my editor would be enough, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if ever, and I don't have the expertise required to hack it on myself.

Until the landscape changes (or someone can suggest suitable Windows software), I will continue to admire Fossil from afar.

On December 26, 2017 10:08:08 AM EST, Damien Sykes <[hidden email]> wrote:

>Hi,
>This is a question I have asked myself many times (I.E. Git projects
>moving
>to Fossil).
>GitHub is well known and boasts over 74 million repositories, yet
>Fossil,
>which both hosts and utilises one of the most well-known database
>systems in
>the world, I doubt can count a thousand. Even the ChiselApp hosting
>platform
>hosts a mere 360 public repositories, Hydra hosts 11, WanderingHorse
>hosts
>23, outside of which lie Fossil itself, the Fossil book, SQLite and
>friends
>(5 publicly accessible repositories in all), and TCL and friends (7
>repositories), making a total of 408. Add SQLite private repositories,
>and
>private repositories that I host, have access to or otherwise generally
>know
>exist, and I come up with an estimate of roughly 470 repositories. Of
>course
>this is not an accurate statistic since it may exclude more private
>repositories, and definitely excludes any local repositories (I for one
>have
>about a dozen Git repositories as Fossil repositories).
>While I am making every attempt to try to persuade friends towards
>Fossil,
>they are also choosing Git. Looks to me like the only people who seem
>to use
>Fossil are those who are most associated with it, which is a real
>shame.
>The only advantage I can see with GitHub is that it's the source code
>Twitter equivalent. Everybody's repository is in one place. As long as
>you
>know the username and repository name you know the full repository URL,
>and
>you don't have to worry about server administration. With Fossil, if I
>wanted to make it feel like github, I.E. address.tld/user/repo, I would
>have
>to script it and serve it via a webserver rather than Fossil's own
>server,
>two processes which I am not at all skilled enough, at least at the
>moment,
>to undertake. To give you an example, I am currently having to run two
>systems, one for my website and one for Fossil, so that they can both
>work
>on port 80, because I know nothing about networking in order to
>understand
>IP addresses, ports and connections in the way I'd need to get a server
>and
>Fossil to run on port 80 on the same machine, nor do I know enough
>about
>webservers to be able to get it to work with CGI. In fact I know so
>little
>that I follow installation guides to the letter and have to do a
>complete
>fresh server reset and reinstall from scratch when something goes wrong
>
>because I haven't a clue how to fix it. If I'm to be totally honest at
>the
>moment I'm even beginning to doubt my own software development skills.
>If there were a Fossil-based github-like system, and both Fossil and
>the
>hosting system were well promoted, Fossil may or may not become the
>norm.
>Having said that, the advantage of Fossil over Git is that, thanks to
>the
>webserver, you can easily look at your changes in a laid-out website,
>even
>on your own machine. I've many a time found myself importing Git
>repositories into Fossil just to look at the timeline. Plus, you don't
>have
>to worry about complicated concepts like pull requests, synchronising
>forks
>and submodules etc. Though it doesn't matter what VCS I use I always
>seem to
>come across, and struggle with, the concept of branching and merging!
>In any case, my incompetencies aside. People seem to be slowly moving
>away
>from SourceForge in favour of GitHub. If only we could make the same
>revolution with Fossil! Ironically when I first came across a site
>called
>FossHub I actually thought that was an attempt to make a Fossil-based
>GitHub. Seems that isn't the case after all.
>Cheers.
>Damien.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Richard Hipp
>Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 1:10 PM
>To: SQLite mailing list
>Cc: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [sqlite] Move to Github!!?
>
>On 12/25/17, Shekhar Reddy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to
>GitHub? I
>> think that would reach more number of people there.
>>
>
>There is a mirror of the SQLite repository on GitHub at
>https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite (maintained by GitHub user "mackyle"
>whom I do not know, but whose efforts I do appreciate).
>
>SQLite uses a different version control system called Fossil.  See
>https://www.fossil-scm.org/ for more information about Fossil.  Fossil
>is superior to Git+GitHub in many respects.  You can easily see this
>by doing a side-by-side comparison of the SQLite Fossil repository
>against the GitHub mirror.
>
>For example, here is the GitHub view of the "dbpage" branch of SQLite:
>
>     https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/commits/dbpage
>
>Compare the above against the equivalent Fossil view:
>
>     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?p=dfdebd12bfc80b91
>
>The Fossil view clearly shows that the head of "dbpage" is the merger
>of two other branches, and Fossil shows clearly where the branch
>diverged from trunk.  That information is very difficult to discern
>from the GitHub view.
>
>Fossil also has the ability to show the complete context of an
>individual branch.  For the "dbpage" branch, the context is shown
>here:
>
>     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?r=dbpage
>
>Note in particular that Fossil clearly shows that the "dbpage" branch
>was ultimately merged back into trunk.  GitHub does not provide that
>information, as far as I can tell.
>
>The basic problem with Git (apart from its notoriously convoluted user
>interface) is that it is based on a (bespoke) key/value database - the
>"packfile".  Fossil, on the other hand, is based on the most widely
>used relational database in the world.  This make information much
>easier to extract from Fossil than from Git.  For example, given a
>commit in Git (perhaps one reported by a customer or one found via
>bisect) there is no easy way in Git to find out what comes next - what
>commits were entered using your commit as a baseline.  Git shows
>ancestors, but not descendants.  Fossil, on the other hand, easily
>shows both descendants and ancestors of a check-in. You see this in
>the "Context" section of any Fossil commit page, such as
>https://www.sqlite.org/src/info/dfdebd12bfc80b91
>
>The fact that Git/GitHub does not show the descendants of a commit is
>a show-stopper for me.
>
>Finally, the use of GitHub would create a reliance on an outside
>company over which we have no influence.  The people who run GitHub
>today seem like great folks.  But the company might be sold or fall
>under new management tomorrow, and the friendly and open policies that
>govern GitHub today might change in an instant.  Fossil, on the other
>hand, is very simple to self-host on a $5/month VPS. (SQLite uses
>https://www.linode.com/ for its main servers and
>https://www.digitalocean.com for the https://www3.sqlite.org/ backup.
>There are lots of others.)
>
>So, given that Fossil is freer than Git (BSD vs. GPL), that Fossil
>embodies all of the functionality of both Git and GitHub, that Fossil
>is more capable than Git/GitHub, that Fossil has a friendly user
>interface than Git, and that Fossil is very easy to self-host and thus
>frees you of any dependencies on third-party companies, the question
>becomes:
>
>Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
>
>--
>D. Richard Hipp
>[hidden email]
>_______________________________________________
>sqlite-users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users 
>
>_______________________________________________
>sqlite-users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Don V Nielsen
> What's not so easy to replace is the Git integration in my editor (Visual
Studio Code)

Same here, but I use JetBrains products. I put a bug in the ear of
JetBrains. At least its something.

Have a good one, all

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 9:27 AM, J. King <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I use Git, but I'm not attached to it. I run my own publicly-accessible
> remote (using Gitea), but that would be completely replaceable with Fossil
> (which I am very impressed by).
>
> What's not so easy to replace is the Git integration in my editor (Visual
> Studio Code) which allows me to easily perform basic operation like commit,
> push, pull, and rebase.
>
> Even just to the ability to review diffs and perform checkins in my editor
> would be enough, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if ever, and I
> don't have the expertise required to hack it on myself.
>
> Until the landscape changes (or someone can suggest suitable Windows
> software), I will continue to admire Fossil from afar.
>
> On December 26, 2017 10:08:08 AM EST, Damien Sykes <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >Hi,
> >This is a question I have asked myself many times (I.E. Git projects
> >moving
> >to Fossil).
> >GitHub is well known and boasts over 74 million repositories, yet
> >Fossil,
> >which both hosts and utilises one of the most well-known database
> >systems in
> >the world, I doubt can count a thousand. Even the ChiselApp hosting
> >platform
> >hosts a mere 360 public repositories, Hydra hosts 11, WanderingHorse
> >hosts
> >23, outside of which lie Fossil itself, the Fossil book, SQLite and
> >friends
> >(5 publicly accessible repositories in all), and TCL and friends (7
> >repositories), making a total of 408. Add SQLite private repositories,
> >and
> >private repositories that I host, have access to or otherwise generally
> >know
> >exist, and I come up with an estimate of roughly 470 repositories. Of
> >course
> >this is not an accurate statistic since it may exclude more private
> >repositories, and definitely excludes any local repositories (I for one
> >have
> >about a dozen Git repositories as Fossil repositories).
> >While I am making every attempt to try to persuade friends towards
> >Fossil,
> >they are also choosing Git. Looks to me like the only people who seem
> >to use
> >Fossil are those who are most associated with it, which is a real
> >shame.
> >The only advantage I can see with GitHub is that it's the source code
> >Twitter equivalent. Everybody's repository is in one place. As long as
> >you
> >know the username and repository name you know the full repository URL,
> >and
> >you don't have to worry about server administration. With Fossil, if I
> >wanted to make it feel like github, I.E. address.tld/user/repo, I would
> >have
> >to script it and serve it via a webserver rather than Fossil's own
> >server,
> >two processes which I am not at all skilled enough, at least at the
> >moment,
> >to undertake. To give you an example, I am currently having to run two
> >systems, one for my website and one for Fossil, so that they can both
> >work
> >on port 80, because I know nothing about networking in order to
> >understand
> >IP addresses, ports and connections in the way I'd need to get a server
> >and
> >Fossil to run on port 80 on the same machine, nor do I know enough
> >about
> >webservers to be able to get it to work with CGI. In fact I know so
> >little
> >that I follow installation guides to the letter and have to do a
> >complete
> >fresh server reset and reinstall from scratch when something goes wrong
> >
> >because I haven't a clue how to fix it. If I'm to be totally honest at
> >the
> >moment I'm even beginning to doubt my own software development skills.
> >If there were a Fossil-based github-like system, and both Fossil and
> >the
> >hosting system were well promoted, Fossil may or may not become the
> >norm.
> >Having said that, the advantage of Fossil over Git is that, thanks to
> >the
> >webserver, you can easily look at your changes in a laid-out website,
> >even
> >on your own machine. I've many a time found myself importing Git
> >repositories into Fossil just to look at the timeline. Plus, you don't
> >have
> >to worry about complicated concepts like pull requests, synchronising
> >forks
> >and submodules etc. Though it doesn't matter what VCS I use I always
> >seem to
> >come across, and struggle with, the concept of branching and merging!
> >In any case, my incompetencies aside. People seem to be slowly moving
> >away
> >from SourceForge in favour of GitHub. If only we could make the same
> >revolution with Fossil! Ironically when I first came across a site
> >called
> >FossHub I actually thought that was an attempt to make a Fossil-based
> >GitHub. Seems that isn't the case after all.
> >Cheers.
> >Damien.
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Richard Hipp
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 1:10 PM
> >To: SQLite mailing list
> >Cc: [hidden email]
> >Subject: Re: [sqlite] Move to Github!!?
> >
> >On 12/25/17, Shekhar Reddy <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to
> >GitHub? I
> >> think that would reach more number of people there.
> >>
> >
> >There is a mirror of the SQLite repository on GitHub at
> >https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite (maintained by GitHub user "mackyle"
> >whom I do not know, but whose efforts I do appreciate).
> >
> >SQLite uses a different version control system called Fossil.  See
> >https://www.fossil-scm.org/ for more information about Fossil.  Fossil
> >is superior to Git+GitHub in many respects.  You can easily see this
> >by doing a side-by-side comparison of the SQLite Fossil repository
> >against the GitHub mirror.
> >
> >For example, here is the GitHub view of the "dbpage" branch of SQLite:
> >
> >     https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/commits/dbpage
> >
> >Compare the above against the equivalent Fossil view:
> >
> >     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?p=dfdebd12bfc80b91
> >
> >The Fossil view clearly shows that the head of "dbpage" is the merger
> >of two other branches, and Fossil shows clearly where the branch
> >diverged from trunk.  That information is very difficult to discern
> >from the GitHub view.
> >
> >Fossil also has the ability to show the complete context of an
> >individual branch.  For the "dbpage" branch, the context is shown
> >here:
> >
> >     https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?r=dbpage
> >
> >Note in particular that Fossil clearly shows that the "dbpage" branch
> >was ultimately merged back into trunk.  GitHub does not provide that
> >information, as far as I can tell.
> >
> >The basic problem with Git (apart from its notoriously convoluted user
> >interface) is that it is based on a (bespoke) key/value database - the
> >"packfile".  Fossil, on the other hand, is based on the most widely
> >used relational database in the world.  This make information much
> >easier to extract from Fossil than from Git.  For example, given a
> >commit in Git (perhaps one reported by a customer or one found via
> >bisect) there is no easy way in Git to find out what comes next - what
> >commits were entered using your commit as a baseline.  Git shows
> >ancestors, but not descendants.  Fossil, on the other hand, easily
> >shows both descendants and ancestors of a check-in. You see this in
> >the "Context" section of any Fossil commit page, such as
> >https://www.sqlite.org/src/info/dfdebd12bfc80b91
> >
> >The fact that Git/GitHub does not show the descendants of a commit is
> >a show-stopper for me.
> >
> >Finally, the use of GitHub would create a reliance on an outside
> >company over which we have no influence.  The people who run GitHub
> >today seem like great folks.  But the company might be sold or fall
> >under new management tomorrow, and the friendly and open policies that
> >govern GitHub today might change in an instant.  Fossil, on the other
> >hand, is very simple to self-host on a $5/month VPS. (SQLite uses
> >https://www.linode.com/ for its main servers and
> >https://www.digitalocean.com for the https://www3.sqlite.org/ backup.
> >There are lots of others.)
> >
> >So, given that Fossil is freer than Git (BSD vs. GPL), that Fossil
> >embodies all of the functionality of both Git and GitHub, that Fossil
> >is more capable than Git/GitHub, that Fossil has a friendly user
> >interface than Git, and that Fossil is very easy to self-host and thus
> >frees you of any dependencies on third-party companies, the question
> >becomes:
> >
> >Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
> >
> >--
> >D. Richard Hipp
> >[hidden email]
> >_______________________________________________
> >sqlite-users mailing list
> >[hidden email]
> >http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >sqlite-users mailing list
> >[hidden email]
> >http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

John McKown
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Don V Nielsen <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> > What's not so easy to replace is the Git integration in my editor (Visual
> Studio Code)
>
> Same here, but I use JetBrains products. I put a bug in the ear of
> JetBrains. At least its something.
>
> Have a good one, all
>

​I don't know either of those products. Mainly because I'm not a Windows'
developer. Do they have a publicly documented interface between their
product and a source maintenance system (e.g. git, cvs, ...)? If not, then
I guess they are dependent on writing a "one off" for every SCM that they
want to support. IMO, that would be very short sighted. ​

--
I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove
it.

Maranatha! <><
John McKown
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Eduardo
In reply to this post by J. King-3
On Tue, 26 Dec 2017 10:27:39 -0500
"J. King" <[hidden email]> escribió:

> I use Git, but I'm not attached to it. I run my own publicly-accessible remote (using Gitea), but that would be completely replaceable with Fossil (which I am very impressed by).
>
> What's not so easy to replace is the Git integration in my editor (Visual Studio Code) which allows me to easily perform basic operation like commit, push, pull, and rebase.
>
> Even just to the ability to review diffs and perform checkins in my editor would be enough, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon, if ever, and I don't have the expertise required to hack it on myself.
>
> Until the landscape changes (or someone can suggest suitable Windows software), I will continue to admire Fossil from afar.
>


When I used VS2015 in the past, I followed this steps:

Create a new menu entry for Fossil:
a) Menu Tools->Customize, "Commands" tab, "Add New Menu" button  // This create a new menu on tool bar
b) Select the "New Menu" created, click on "Modify Selection" button and change its name to "Fossil"
c) Move it up or down and click "Close" button when finished

Create "External Tools"
a) Menu Tools->External Tools...,
b) Click on "Add" button
c) Fill data: "Title=Commit", "Command=C:\Fossil\fossil.exe", "Argument=commit -m", "Initial Directory=$(ProjectDir)"
d) Check the check boxes "Use Output Windows", "Prompt for Argument"
e) Annotate the entry number of the external command, if it's the 3rd or 7th.

Add created external tool to Fossil menu
a) Menu Tools->Customize, "Commands" tab,
b) Check "Menu bar" radius button and select "Fossil" from the selectable list (Default value is "Menu Bar")
c) The "Controls" display should be empty for the first fossil command,
d) Click "Add Command" button, select "Tools" from "Categories" left list and "External Command XX" where XX is the number annotated,
e) Click "Modify Selection" to change name to "Fossil Commit"


Add commands as needed, but don't change the order in "Tools" menu, the number annotated correspond with the "Fossil" menu entry, if you rearrange them, you'll call the wrong external tool.

HTH, but command prompt is easier for me.

--
Eduardo <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

J Decker
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Richard Hipp <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Finally, the use of GitHub would create a reliance on an outside
> company over which we have no influence.  The people who run GitHub
> today seem like great folks.  But the company might be sold or fall
> under new management tomorrow, and the friendly and open policies that
> govern GitHub today might change in an instant.  Fossil, on the other
> hand, is very simple to self-host on a $5/month VPS. (SQLite uses
> https://www.linode.com/ for its main servers and
> https://www.digitalocean.com for the https://www3.sqlite.org/ backup.
> There are lots of others.)
>
>
And there's nothing stopping anyone from hosting their own git repositories
with or without a web interface.  I have a backup repos at work, on my home
server and github.

A large list of extra tools ... probably at least one has immediate
descendents available.

https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Interfaces,_frontends,_and_tools


> So, given that Fossil is freer than Git (BSD vs. GPL), that Fossil
> embodies all of the functionality of both Git and GitHub, that Fossil
> is more capable than Git/GitHub, that Fossil has a friendly user
> interface than Git, and that Fossil is very easy to self-host and thus
> frees you of any dependencies on third-party companies, the question
> becomes:
>
> Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
>
> --
> D. Richard Hipp
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

J Decker
In reply to this post by Richard Hipp-3
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Richard Hipp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 12/25/17, Shekhar Reddy <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Is there any particular reason that the source is not moved to GitHub? I
> > think that would reach more number of people there.
> >
>
> There is a mirror of the SQLite repository on GitHub at
> https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite (maintained by GitHub user "mackyle"
> whom I do not know, but whose efforts I do appreciate).
>
> SQLite uses a different version control system called Fossil.  See
> https://www.fossil-scm.org/ for more information about Fossil.  Fossil
> is superior to Git+GitHub in many respects.  You can easily see this
> by doing a side-by-side comparison of the SQLite Fossil repository
> against the GitHub mirror.
>
> For example, here is the GitHub view of the "dbpage" branch of SQLite:
>
>      https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/commits/dbpage
>
> Compare the above against the equivalent Fossil view:
>
>      https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?p=dfdebd12bfc80b91
>
> The Fossil view clearly shows that the head of "dbpage" is the merger
> of two other branches, and Fossil shows clearly where the branch
> diverged from trunk.  That information is very difficult to discern
> from the GitHub view.
>

That's a limitation of the webpage interface not of git itself...  (would
include a picture but I can't... well maybe I can indirectly...

 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1mhDcCotCMVyI3PF70dCvD4AAyVZGVoWW


> Fossil also has the ability to show the complete context of an
> individual branch.  For the "dbpage" branch, the context is shown
> here:
>
>      https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?r=dbpage
>
> Note in particular that Fossil clearly shows that the "dbpage" branch
> was ultimately merged back into trunk.  GitHub does not provide that
> information, as far as I can tell.
>

Or all the forks of a popular project...
https://github.com/bulletphysics/bullet3/network


>
> The basic problem with Git (apart from its notoriously convoluted user
> interface) is that it is based on a (bespoke) key/value database - the
> "packfile".  Fossil, on the other hand, is based on the most widely
> used relational database in the world.  This make information much
> easier to extract from Fossil than from Git.  For example, given a
> commit in Git (perhaps one reported by a customer or one found via
> bisect) there is no easy way in Git to find out what comes next - what
> commits were entered using your commit as a baseline.  Git shows
> ancestors, but not descendants.  Fossil, on the other hand, easily
> shows both descendants and ancestors of a check-in. You see this in
> the "Context" section of any Fossil commit page, such as
> https://www.sqlite.org/src/info/dfdebd12bfc80b91
>
> The fact that Git/GitHub does not show the descendants of a commit is
> a show-stopper for me.
>
> For t he view around a single commit I can see that might be something you
could get used to... but the graph line is complete and available to know
what is both before and after a commit in overall views.


> Finally, the use of GitHub would create a reliance on an outside
> company over which we have no influence.  The people who run GitHub
> today seem like great folks.  But the company might be sold or fall
> under new management tomorrow, and the friendly and open policies that
> govern GitHub today might change in an instant.  Fossil, on the other
> hand, is very simple to self-host on a $5/month VPS. (SQLite uses
> https://www.linode.com/ for its main servers and
> https://www.digitalocean.com for the https://www3.sqlite.org/ backup.
> There are lots of others.)
>
> So, given that Fossil is freer than Git (BSD vs. GPL), that Fossil
> embodies all of the functionality of both Git and GitHub, that Fossil
> is more capable than Git/GitHub, that Fossil has a friendly user
> interface than Git, and that Fossil is very easy to self-host and thus
> frees you of any dependencies on third-party companies, the question
> becomes:
>
> Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
>
>
Because Pull Requests, and a larger variety of tools to deal with Git
repositories.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Bob Friesenhahn
On Tue, 26 Dec 2017, J Decker wrote:
>> Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
>>
> Because Pull Requests, and a larger variety of tools to deal with Git
> repositories.

It is good that such tools are available to help surmount Git's
extreme complexity.  Are there such tools available for Fossil?

Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
[hidden email], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Keith Medcalf

Isn't GitHub a place for Gits to hang out, sort of like Twitter is a place for Twits to hang out?

---
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-
>[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bob Friesenhahn
>Sent: Tuesday, 26 December, 2017 12:08
>To: SQLite mailing list
>Subject: Re: [sqlite] Move to Github!!?
>
>On Tue, 26 Dec 2017, J Decker wrote:
>>> Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
>>>
>> Because Pull Requests, and a larger variety of tools to deal with
>Git
>> repositories.
>
>It is good that such tools are available to help surmount Git's
>extreme complexity.  Are there such tools available for Fossil?
>
>Bob
>--
>Bob Friesenhahn
>[hidden email],
>http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
>GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
>_______________________________________________
>sqlite-users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users



_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

J Decker
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Keith Medcalf <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Isn't GitHub a place for Gits to hang out, sort of like Twitter is a place
> for Twits to hang out?
>

Nope that's gitter.im (related, and integrates well with github for talking
about issues and pull requests.  Will even pull information about issues
creates/commented on and commits.  Really nice for talking about code
fragments since it supports markdown.


>
> ---
> The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says
> a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-
> >[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bob Friesenhahn
> >Sent: Tuesday, 26 December, 2017 12:08
> >To: SQLite mailing list
> >Subject: Re: [sqlite] Move to Github!!?
> >
> >On Tue, 26 Dec 2017, J Decker wrote:
> >>> Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
> >>>
> >> Because Pull Requests, and a larger variety of tools to deal with
> >Git
> >> repositories.
> >
> >It is good that such tools are available to help surmount Git's
> >extreme complexity.  Are there such tools available for Fossil?
> >
> >Bob
> >--
> >Bob Friesenhahn
> >[hidden email],
> >http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
> >GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
> >_______________________________________________
> >sqlite-users mailing list
> >[hidden email]
> >http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sqlite-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Simon Slavin-3
In reply to this post by Bob Friesenhahn
On 26 Dec 2017, at 7:07pm, Bob Friesenhahn <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Dec 2017, J Decker wrote:
>
>>> Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to Fossil!
>>
>> Because Pull Requests, and a larger variety of tools to deal with Git
>> repositories.
>
> It is good that such tools are available to help surmount Git's extreme complexity. Are there such tools available for Fossil?

Your question assumes that Fossil has such extreme complexity that such tools are needed.  And that Fossil has drawbacks that needs surmounting.

I bet you tell people not to move from Windows to the Mac for the same reason.

Simon.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Move to Github!!?

Keith Medcalf
In reply to this post by J Decker
On Tuesday, 26 December, 2017 13:28, J Decker <[hidden email]> wrote:

>On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Keith Medcalf <[hidden email]>
>wrote:

>> Isn't GitHub a place for Gits to hang out, sort of like Twitter is
>> a place for Twits to hang out?

>Nope that's gitter.im (related, and integrates well with github for
>talking about issues and pull requests.  Will even pull information about
>issues creates/commented on and commits.  Really nice for talking about code
>fragments since it supports markdown.

I just looked at Git (for Windows).  What a horrid abomination it is!

Fossil does all the same things in a SINGLE < 5 Megabyte executable.  

Git is a horrid huge pile of crap that is several orders of magnitude larger and includes a whole mess of crap with built-in interferences with other software.  There is no way that I would permit it to be installed on any computer of mine.  At least it does not appear to use CYGWIN (which would preclude it from being in the same building as a computer).

Since I already appeared to have a copy from some time ago in a repository, I expect that I looked at it once before and arrived at the same conclusion -- it is not software that one ought to allow to be installed on a non-entertainment-only computer that runs Windows.

>> ---
>> The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to
>> Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.

>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-
>> >[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bob Friesenhahn
>> >Sent: Tuesday, 26 December, 2017 12:08
>> >To: SQLite mailing list
>> >Subject: Re: [sqlite] Move to Github!!?
>> >
>> >On Tue, 26 Dec 2017, J Decker wrote:
>> >>> Why aren't you moving all of your GitHub projects over to
>Fossil!
>> >>>
>> >> Because Pull Requests, and a larger variety of tools to deal
>with
>> >Git
>> >> repositories.
>> >
>> >It is good that such tools are available to help surmount Git's
>> >extreme complexity.  Are there such tools available for Fossil?
>> >
>> >Bob
>> >--
>> >Bob Friesenhahn
>> >[hidden email],
>> >http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
>> >GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >sqlite-users mailing list
>> >[hidden email]
>> >http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-
>users
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sqlite-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-
>users
>>
>_______________________________________________
>sqlite-users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users



_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
123