Calling it "not forking" (saying what it's not) instead of what it is adds some unnecessary cognitive burden. (It might be hard to find a good name, still.) Th

Calling it "not forking" (saying what it's not) instead of what it is adds some unnecessary cognitive burden. (It might be hard to find a good name, still.) The overall kind of situation it offers to solve is somehow familiar, the questions are relevant. But the way the tool works is unclear. Hints about what it does are in the last section of "Why Not Just Use Git/Fossil/Other VCS?" part. It might be just me, but perl + "fossil instead of git" skews my bayesian expectations. Gut feeling is: perhaps the tool was used for a long time, grew organically from a local hack. Reworking that page in clear sections might be best. Most information is already there, just it would be nice to reorder in very clear sections: * what problem developers face (is there, in the beginning, not in its own section) * existing solutions, and for each how it falls short (only hints in "why not..." near the end, mixed with examples) * the principle of the solution to be put forth here (this part is mostly missing, probably a case of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge ) * how this tool is used in practice. This is missing and would be best served with simple but real-worldish examples Hope this helps. Since I'm not sure upstream author will see this, reported there as https://lumosql.org/src/not-forking/tktview/f99ea3a437d0a77c54d49424874bb3b3966842c7 https://lumosql.org/src/not-forking/tktview/f99ea3a437d0a77c...