3 ms·

I'm almost in the same boat. I'm putting all new repos in Fossil. I like being able to have complete control over the web interface. I like that it's lightweig

I'm almost in the same boat. I'm putting all new repos in Fossil. I like being able to have complete control over the web interface. I like that it's lightweight, unlike say Gitlab, yet provides a full website. I like that the bug tracker is part of the repo rather than part of a company's proprietary infrastructure. The biggest advantage, by far, is that it's not Git. I agree that Git is good for a lot of projects. It's an unnecessarily complicated beast for small projects with a couple of collaborators, neither of whom are willing to spend hours dealing with weird commands to handle a repo that got messed up for unknown reasons. Fossil, unlike Git, is version control that others are willing to use.

morbidhawk 10y ago
I agree 100%, I'm a lot happier with it for personal projects especially once I got the hang of it, and you get a lot of web tools that are baked into it nicely. The only concern going into it was knowing that I couldn't change/undo previous history but since using it I actually think that is a version control feature you want (assuming you don't slip in a password) so you don't risk losing previous data, you just have to be more thorough in looking at what you are committing.
- bachmeier 10y ago
  > assuming you don't slip in a password You actually can delete a password using shunning, but it's not a regular part of the development process. (I only mention that because many potential users are scared off because they misinterpret not being able to change history.)