=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ramon_Rib=F3?= <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is a proposal for how I think "fossil rm" should work. It's > > consistent with how "svn rm" works. > > At present it's not what happens. > > > I was refering to the fact that "fossil update" currently does not recreate > a deleted file. It is necessary to do a "fossil revert". There are some > people, > myself included, that think that "fossil update" should recreate deleted > files. >
What's also interesting in this debate say you do (currently) $ fossil rm zip.c $ fossil status DELETED zip.c $ fossil revert zip.c revert file 'zip.c'? this will destory local changes [y/N]? y $ fossil status DELETED zip.c $ fossil add zip.c ADDED zip.c $ fossil status no output except common headers i.e. fossil revert does not place a DELETED file back into the repo. Jeremy
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
