Forums : Suggestions for Ohloh 2.0
Dear Open Hub Users,
We’re excited to announce that we will be moving the Open Hub Forum to
https://community.blackduck.com/s/black-duck-open-hub.
Beginning immediately, users can head over,
register,
get technical help and discuss issue pertinent to the Open Hub. Registered users can also subscribe to Open Hub announcements here.
On May 1, 2020, we will be freezing https://www.openhub.net/forums and users will not be able to create new discussions. If you have any questions and concerns, please email us at
[email protected]
Support Fossil SCM
At least because of SQLite.
The Tcl/tk core platform has also recently migrated from CVS to Fossil. Some other related packages are also following.
+1 (also for fossil itself!)
Mind you, we've got a temporary bridge in place for the Tcl/Tk core platform via Git.
I'd also like that. I publish most of my projects using fossil, and ohloh makes their pages look very poor, as if had no public VCS at all.
Maybe there could be at least a way to tell Link to the public VCS
, in those cases.
+1 for fossil support
+1 for fossil support as well. All of my projects source code is managed in fossil repositories.
Another +1. Re @Donal Fellows, how difficult is it to keep fossil and git repos in sync?
+1 for fossil support.
Here is ticket in Fossil tracker:
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/tktview?name=0f36ec7790
Hi!
There is a built-in way to import/export Git:
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/inout.wiki
Does this make it easier/faster to add Fossil support?
Thanks!
M ;-)
Does this make it easier/faster to add Fossil support?
Probably not. It would be very hard to keep the repositories in sync this way.
Does this make it easier/faster to add Fossil support?
While it might be awkward if you were looking to exchange artifacts in both directions (i.e., when doing development) it would be fine enough when just tracking. Indeed, I've seen people doing just that, using a cronjob to regularly pull the changes. Note also that Fossil is stricter than Git about changes; it never deletes artifacts (though can have a “don't tell people about this artifact” artifact entered if necessary) so anyone just pulling will never (modulo crypto hash collisions) have conflicts. Being strictly downstream is easy, and I believe that's all that Ohloh needs.
Is there any hope to see Fossil support here soon or it's simply not on your agenda?
Gour,
Somewhere I remember a program that adapts Fossil repositories to be treated as if they were another repository (perhaps git?). Can you remember what that program was? That could help get Fossil support moving... Otherwise it's pretty far below the surface and unlikely to see much attention soon. Also, if you want to investigate, we have our repository management software as open-source at https://github.com/blackducksw/ohloh_scm where you can see how our various interfaces are organized and get a better idea what it takes to create a new one.
Thanks!
After several years of handling GIT mirror of my fossil repository (Fresh IDE) only because of Open Hub/Ohloh, I stopped it, because it simply does not worth to support working server only for the very occasional visits of Open Hub bot.
So, if Open Hub wants access to my code (and all these fossil repositories out there), they will have to provide support for Fossil.
If not - well, I don't care at all about Open Hub and their business. :P