Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> writes: > Excluded in the wc is just that. It does not mean "delete upon commit." We > have other statii to mean that.
In 1.6 when we copy a tree containing deleted=true we mark the copied node so that it gets deleted upon commit. Are we going to change that? If we mark the node excluded do we use some additional mark to indicate delete? > Imagine a local-copy of a large tree, simul with excluding a large portion > so that u don't have to keep/copy as much locally. That doesn't mean > "delete". It is simply an organizational mechanism. When one tags such a working copy should the organizational mechanism be included in the tag? I can see arguments for and against. The current behaviour is not even consistent: exporting is sparse, wc-to-wc copy is sparse, wc-to-repo copy is not sparse, commit is not sparse. However that's not really an urgent question. How we represent replaces is more pressing. -- Philip
