On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 09:14 +0000, Benjohn Barnes wrote: > Joshua Paine wrote about having a script recursively add and remove to > make the repository reflect what is currently on disk (please correct > me if this isn't a fair summary!).
That was the idea. > you don't get any > tracking of that in the repository as (I believe) you would get by > issuing a "fossil mv <old-name> <new-name>" command. Instead the > fossil history will contain a "fossil rm <old-name>" and a "fossil add > <new-name>". I was definitely thinking with my git and svn brain here. svn allegedly tracked renames but never actually seemed to provide any usefulness in my experience (so if fossil worked the same way, losing the rename info wouldn't ultimately matter). git tracks content more than filenames, so in git you really wouldn't lose anything by doing it that way. I haven't tested fossil features wrt renames. -- Joshua Paine LetterBlock: Web applications built with joy http://letterblock.com/ 301-576-1920 _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
