(Replying to PARENT post)

Seems like Fossil is more like an alternative to GitHub than Git. Fossil not only tracks code changes but team chat, bug tracking, wikis, etc.
๐Ÿ‘คumvi๐Ÿ•‘3y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Fossil is an alternative to both git (source control) and github (issues, etc).

I think its brilliant having issues tracked in fossil. Part of the promise of github is that the user is in control, since your computer is a first-class citizen of a repository. You have all the code, and all the history on your computer. You can use github, but you don't need github, since its just another node in git's distributed network.

But that promise falls apart with issues and pull requests. Issues and pull requests don't get replicated by git. If github goes down, you can't interact with issues. If github ever turns evil, or you decide you want to self host git over ssh or something, you lose the history of all your issues and conversations.

Git is a distributed, replicated data format. Why are issues fully centralized? Its bizarre - You can have a project on both github and gitlab. And you can replicate commits to both. But you can't replicate issues using the same mechanism.

Fossil is far from perfect, but I think putting the issues and stuff into the repository itself is brilliant.

๐Ÿ‘คjosephg๐Ÿ•‘3y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Yes and no. It tracks the issues in the source repo. Everything is an artifact and some artifacts are bugs, technotes, etc

https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/fileformat.wiki

This is from the same person who made SQLite.

๐Ÿ‘คleetrout๐Ÿ•‘3y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

That's the "batteries included" bit!
๐Ÿ‘คsimonw๐Ÿ•‘3y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

This has always been my #1 reservation about it. Seems like a weird degree of feature creep to me.
๐Ÿ‘คphilwelch๐Ÿ•‘3y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0