On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Joan Picanyol i Puig <[email protected] > wrote:
> > The repo file itself needs to live somewhere outside of the "source > tree." > > I'm not convinced this is true, in fact I believe I've had the repo at > the root of the checkout some times. > Sorry, i was thinking of another case: trying to open a repo from within another repo. IIRC fossil fails by default if you do this but allows a flag override that (i may be wrong about the flag). > > Why not just do everything from the root dir? Chicken-egg - the repo > > file will then live under the directory which it controls (this is > > considered [by myself to be] bad practice). > > fossil will ignore the repo file if you don't add it. In the general case it's bad practice to keep the repo in the directory being controlled. Too many things can go wrong. e.g. i once did a global find/grep/replace in a source tree and, due to a broken glob, ended up corrupting my repo file. (i've done similar things to svn checkouts more than once, hosing the .svn directory state.) > I believe the (basic) Unix permission model can be easily supported in > post-NT-Windows. > i'm willing to bet that if sufficient[ly portable] patches were contributed, Richard would bless them. That could be a good idea, but the file format does not seem to be > easily extended to support tagging "F"ile cards, since "T"ags are a card > in the manifest as well. I believe it is much easier to extend de "F"ile > card specification in a backward compatible way by specifying a 3 digit > special code to mean "this permissions as defined by chmod()". Extend it > still further to preserve uid<->login. > i have no idea - i'm not familiar with the raw manifest format. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
