I said that Fossil has no patch-based workflow. You say few projects use it. I said that it can't rebase. You say that I shouldn't rebase. I said that the bu

I said that Fossil has no patch-based workflow. You say few projects use it. I said that it can't rebase. You say that I shouldn't rebase. I said that the bug tracker was hard to use because it's last-wins, not DAG based, which is a problem for a distributed bug tracker (Trac is not distributed, so it doesn't need to be DAG-based). You respond that Fossil has a bug tracker. In all these cases, you don't refute my points. You're merely arguing they're immaterial. As such, your accusations of FUD and name-calling seem strange and defensive. You're welcome to contend that Fossil does not need these features, but since many projects and developers that I work with use them heavily, I think it'd make more sense to discuss why they are unnecessary or wrong.