Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

>> Not that this is much consolation to you, Warren, or anyone else that ever >> had to deal with this, but the merge issue will be fixed in the next release >> (or now if you compile your own Fossil binary): > Thank you, drh! And thanks to Joel for taking on this long-lasting and annoying

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On May 16, 2016, at 4:37 PM, Joel Bruick wrote: > > j. van den hoff wrote: >> On Mon, 16 May 2016 19:02:17 +0200, Warren Young wrote: >> >>> 2. If you attempt to merge a change between branches where one of the >>> changed files was renamed after the

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

j. van den hoff wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2016 19:02:17 +0200, Warren Young wrote: 1. f finfo can’t trace file history back through a rename. The web version of this (f ui > Files > Ancestry) does manage to report the rename, but it doesn’t trace history back through that

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On Mon, 16 May 2016 19:02:17 +0200, Warren Young wrote: 1. f finfo can’t trace file history back through a rename. The web version of this (f ui > Files > Ancestry) does manage to report the rename, but it doesn’t trace history back through that link to the old name.

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On 5/16/16, Ross Berteig wrote: > >>> That would require a backwards-incompatible change to the manifest format > > Unless some clever trick can be invented that will let older versions of > fossil simply see such files as newly added at the time of the copy > while letting

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On May 16, 2016, at 2:48 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > > On 5/16/2016 9:53 AM, Warren Young wrote: >> On May 14, 2016, at 4:35 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: >>> But in svn, now that i think about it, cp is, in practice, only used for >>> branching. >> ... >>

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On 5/16/2016 9:53 AM, Warren Young wrote: On May 14, 2016, at 4:35 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: But in svn, now that i think about it, cp is, in practice, only used for branching. ... If the SCM doesn’t remember that y.cpp was cloned from x.cpp Actually, a copy

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On May 14, 2016, at 4:11 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > Fossil does have an 'mv' command which does retain history. Kind of. f mv breaks anything that’s keyed off the file name, since files in Fossil are identified by their path within the repo. I’ve run into two main

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On May 14, 2016, at 4:35 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > > But in svn, now that i think about it, cp is, in practice, only used for > branching. No, not “only.” For example, I have a small repo containing a bunch of test programs. They’re all very similar, sharing perhaps

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

Hi Stephan, On 14 May 2016, at 12:35 , Stephan Beal wrote: > But in svn, now that i think about it, cp is, in practice, only used for > branching. i've never seen it used to copy something within the same tree. maybe. So, I might have abused it all along. :) > That

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Marko Käning wrote: > On 14 May 2016, at 12:11 , Stephan Beal wrote: > > in 20+ years of using source control, i've never seen an 'cp' command > (maybe i've just overlooked it in CVS/SVN). Fossil does have an

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On 14 May 2016, at 12:11 , Stephan Beal wrote: > in 20+ years of using source control, i've never seen an 'cp' command (maybe > i've just overlooked it in CVS/SVN). Fossil does have an 'mv' command which > does retain history. Copying the same file to multiple places,

Re: [fossil-users] No progress on "fossil cp"

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Marko Käning wrote: > Hi devs, > > as it seems there is no demand of a “cp” command for fossil, really, as > nothing > seems to have been done about it in the last 3 years [1]. > > I guess, it’s the same issue: someone would have to