On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Richard Hipp <[email protected]> wrote:
> You know you can rename _FOSSIL_ as .fos, right? > > mv _FOSSIL_ .fos > > Should I make .fos the default > While i'm all for Unix-style names, i think the name .fos might confuse more people than it would help, whereas _FOSSIL_ "clearly" has something to do with fossil, and the unconventional _ at the start and end "clearly" mean that there's something special about it (i.e. "don't touch it"). (At least i've always found it intuitive enough.) Might there not be a "documentation impact" (i.e., invalidating lots of older docs) if this particular default is changed? PS: i didn't know it could be renamed. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
