When should I use fossil open and fossil close?
(1) By Thomas M (tmunnlx) on 2023-06-07 22:24:01 [link] [source]
I am very new to fossil, and have figured out what seems to be checking in, out, and stuff like that. But my question is:
Should I after committing all my changes at the end of the day do a 'fossil close' from my directory where my source files are being tracked from? and then an "fossil open" in the same directory the next day? or do I just leave the fossil open command.
Where its more interesting, if two people are using the same database on a fileserver is it a good idea to close the repo when I am done with it?
Thomas
(2) By Richard Hipp (drh) on 2023-06-07 23:01:34 in reply to 1 [link] [source]
I designed and created Fossil and I don’t think I have ever once done a “fossil close” except when testing Fossil. So, no, you don’t need to do that.
Your post (and others like it) make me think I should have never created the “fossil close” command. :-)
Multiple people can use the same repo at the same time. But it seems better and easier and more fossil-like to make your own clone.
(3) By Doug (doug9forester) on 2023-06-08 01:58:59 in reply to 1 [link] [source]
The words same database on a fileserver shouted a warning to me. A fossil database is an Sqlite database. And I understand that accessing an Sqlite database on a network is asking for it to be corrupted.
Did I get that wrong?
(4) By sean (jungleboogie) on 2023-06-08 03:10:17 in reply to 1 [source]
When in doubt, do as Richard recommends.
However, I seem to recall discussion around fossil close when it was regarding writing the repo to a thumb drive.
I think the general idea was someone was committing files to a thumb drive and issued a fossil close before removing/ejecting the thumb drive.
If multiple people are using the same repo, it would be best to clone it locally.
Fossil has a built in server so the repo can be cloned very easily.
server command and various options to host your repo.
(5) By Andy Bradford (andybradford) on 2023-06-08 04:28:42 in reply to 4 [link] [source]
> If multiple people are using the same repo, it would be best to clone > it locally. > > Fossil has a built in server so the repo can be cloned very easily. However, keep in mind that if people are "local" as in using the same system for accessing the Fossil repository, there is no need to run "fossil server" for cloning purposes. Fossil can just as easily clone from a filesystem path as long as all people cloning have read/write access to it. For example, assuming that you have a shared repository named /var/repositories/project.fossil and you have properly configured permission on the same, then all users with access could do something like: $ fossil clone /var/repositories/project.fossil ~/repos/project.fossil $ mkdir ~/src/project $ cd ~/src/project $ fossil open ~/repos/project.fossil Then when your users commit something into their "clone", it will get automatically synchronized (default behavior is autosync on) to /var/repositories/project.fossil If you really want more granular control over what each individual user can do, though, "fossil server" would be better. Andy