Do fossil-scm has features like github labels - version-control

Labelling in github really a useful way to separate and track issues in clean and convenient manner, so is there something similar in fossil ?

You don't have freely assignable tags in Fossil tickets. Instead there is a predefined type dropdown field (with values like defect, documentation, feature request, ...). Since the whole ticketing component in a Fossil repository can be customized by the user it's easy to adapt this to your wishes. You could even create an additional field in your tickets. It depends on what you want to achieve.
Here is the Fossil documentation on how to customize the ticket system.

Related

Is it possible to filter weblate push per language by completeness rate

General situation
We have a project on GitHub and in hosted.weblate in the libre plan.
The weblate project contains 3 components and a glossary.
Two languages are already completely translated and we use the continuous localization workflow.
There are some additional languages from the very kind community. However, these are not complete(d yet), so they cause problems in the front end (like showing no text or the plain string.variable.name).
What should be achieved?
We would like to have the incomplete languages only available after they are complete (at least have no empty strings). So they should be pushed only if either a manual flag is set/removed or at a certain completeness level. Is there a way or best practice on how to deal with that?
Ideas to achieve it (but no idea if this is possible)
An idea would be to only commit changes on languages, that have a certain overall completeness level. For the languages that are completed already we would ideally keep the continuous translation workflow. Also manual commits are problematic, since they would commit also the incomplete languages.
Is there a way to set a flag or achieve a .gitignore like behaviour for certain languages in weblate? When they are not empty anymore, we could of course manually activate the languages.
I've set up a translation project for Syncthing on Hosted Weblate, which was previously handled through Transifex. There was already some tooling in place which respects this completeness filter, and it was pretty easy to adapt to Weblate.
Basically we don't push Weblate changes back to the upstream repo, but pull them in through a regularly called script, together with some other housekeeping tasks like an authors list. The script checks the statistics on every available language and if the completion is above 95 percent, the language is added to a "valid" list, which the GUI uses to offer choices. Translations previously on that list drop off only if they fall below 75 percent completion.
In any case, the script downloads the most recent translation files and commits them to the upstream repo for archival reasons. When this happens, Weblate picks up the new commits and rebases its internal repo. That also allows integrating translation contributions from other sources easily.
It is currently not possible, but there is issue tracking this: https://github.com/WeblateOrg/weblate/issues/3745

Is there a way to easily search for / list template repositories on Github?

Is there a way to easily search for / list template repositories on Github?
Templates are quite interesting because they allow to create a new project from a, well, template without having to get all the history with it.
An example with Spring Boot : https://github.com/Spring-Boot-Framework/Spring-Boot-Application-Template.
I tried the usual search on Github itself but using the "template" query doesn't give any meaningful results because many repositories use the "template" string without the actual Github meaning. I couldn't find any way to tag those repos either.
Even the API search page doesn't seem to include proper qualifiers for template repositories.
That leaves me to wonder how they can actually become useful since the discoverability is so low at the moment.
Thanks!
Got an answer from Github support yesterday. As of now, it is not possible.
Hi Julien,
Thank you for writing to GitHub Support.
If I understand you correctly, you want a way to search for repositories but only show template repositories.
If so, then, unfortunately such functionality does not exist. If you want, I can pass this ticket to our product team which reads and evaluates feedback about our products.
Regards,
Paul
GitHub Support

How to compare a file between different GitHub repositories (for clarity in a pull request)?

When creating a GitHub Pull Request, it is often that a file (script, lib, etc.) may be completely replaced (or introduced) with one from another repo. Sometimes, the file requires small changes. I'm trying to establish a standard for my team for how to communicate where the file came from and what changed. In the same way that you can craft a URL to highlight a specific change in a single repo, I'd like to be able to highlight a change across repos.
The reality may very well be that GitHub does not offer this. (I do a lot of research before asking questions. Consequently, the answer is often, "you couldn't find an answer because it is impossible.") In which case an alternative will be needed. One possibility might be to generate a diff in markdown and add it as a comment. (Notice I improved that answer back in 2016.)
One possibility might be to generate a diff in markdown and add it as a comment.
Good idea.
One alternative which would not depend on a PR comment would be to use git notes. They are not supported/displayed by GitHub since 2014 and they are criticised, but they would remain in your case possible way to leave... well a note describing where some of the PR files are coming from.

Work-arounds for the lack of version control branching support in Enterprise Architect

From the user guide
Currently, Enterprise Architect does not support Version Control Branching.
Work-arounds to achieve similar results might be possible for certain version-control products; contact Sparx Support for advice.
The support channel available to me has not been very responsive so let's see what SO has to say about it. Basically I want to manage my model the same way I manage the product it's modelling so when my product repository is branched I want the model to branch with it. What are the different ways to deal with this? Pros/cons?
First of all: a model is not code. The difficulty with a model (in XMI format) is that it looks like being readable but in fact it isn't. So the problem comes with merging. While a merge in code will create obvious results (compiler errors due to bad merges can be corrected more or less easily) a wrong merge for a model simply creates rubbish. For that reason you can not branch and merge a model.
Now, how can you go about this? As said: there is no easy solution. One way is to create separate repositories for each branch. As long as the branches live independent you're fine. But how can you merge changes from one branch to the other? Sad to say, but the only way I can recommend it the manual one. There is actually no usable compare tool for UML models. You need to locate the changes per package and export that package.
If (and it's impossible to explain in a few sentences) the changes are just local to that package you can import the changes via a simple XMI import.
If you are able to locate changes to single elements you can create a dummy package, move those elements temporarily into that package and move it over. That will update the elements in the other branch but also move them from their original position (as you did in the first branch) and you need to move the elements back to where they were in both branches and get rid of the dummy package.
In case of structural changes you're probably better off doing the change manually in the other branch and have an eye review.
To sum up: model branches are nothing you like to work with. Look for alternative ways. The best is likely to have everything in one model and find ways to mark the branches inside the model using packages structures, tagged values or whatever. Not easy to handle either.

Mercurial hosting with folders / repository organizing capabilities

I'm currently using Bitbucket for my Mercurial repositories and it's working great. I would however like to be able to organize my repositories in folders, as having them all in one long list is a bit disorganized for my liking.
To be clear I'd like to be able to access my repositories kind of like this:
hg clone https://username#bitbucket.org/username/foldername/reponame
While (AFAIK) it is currently only possible to use a single reponame, no foldername.
Is there any Mercurial hosting provider that does this, or is there some other method that might help me organize my stuff?
I'm aware of subrepos and I might look into that, but it seems like a hackish solution to my problem (also one of the clusters I am working on uses an ancient Mercurial version from way before subrepos were added). Another possibility would be to have multiple user accounts for Bitbucket, but again that doesn't really scale well (I don't want to wind up with 10 accounts).
You will have to use separate repositories.
Kiln has a nice interface that supports multiple repositories.
Organize Your Code
Start simply by just creating the repositories you need for your
code. Kiln introduces branch repositories, repository groups, and
projects to help keep things organized as you develop your own
workflow.
...
Repository Groups and Projects are there to help keep related code
grouped together. Whether your software project is large or small, it
can be really helpful to separate different parts of the code into
different repositories. What used to be accomplished with complicated
naming schemes is now accomplished with simple labels and
drag-and-drop organization.
Kiln (kilnhg.com) has a concept of projects and groups for organizing repositories along with several other really cool features.
It is a commercial product, however. (Your question didn't mention whether or not that was a problem for you.)
The only way you can obtain this using Bitbucket is to create a single repository named "foldername" and put the sub-repository inside this 'root repository'. This however is not the best practice according to the mercurial philosophy. Also, you will have a single bitbucket panel as per a single repository.
You can then use the mercurial feature Suprepositories to manage the whole collection:
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/Subrepository
Read about the kind of layout you are looking for here:
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/UnderstandingMercurial
(point 6, at the end of the page)
Of course you can setup your personal mercural server to do this, but is a little bit tricky and I discourage it. If you wanto to try, you can start from here:
http://ekkescorner.wordpress.com/blog-series/git-mercurial/step-by-step-install-mercurial-server-on-ubuntu/