On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Jacek Cała <[email protected]> wrote:
> The thing is that either I'll commit these file every time they change
> (which makes a bit of mess in the repo) or I need to do a selective
> commit which omits these files (which after a tens of commits become a
> bit annoying).
>
Coincidentally, i had just the same problem all last weekend, where i
didn't want to commit my makefile changes to the main repo (owned by
someone else). Before every commit i had to remove my Makefile symlink and
revert the old copy to ensure that i didn't hose the original, and
afterwards had to delete the in-tree copy and symlink it over to my
makefile. Annoying, yes, and i eventually worked around it by restructuring
the build to allow for a developer-local makefile to set up the local build
configuration before including the master makefile.
So the problem is there, yes, but i don't see how an SCM can help with that
particular case. It sees the original versions and considers any file with
a name it knows about to be under SCM control. i think that's a fair
assumption (and there's not an SCM out there which does not do this).
i'm not personally convinced that an ignore list would completely solve the
problem (i think that just might lead to more confusion ("i changed the
file, why isn't it showing as changed?") and corresponding bug reports).
But it might be a solution or part of a solution. Can you elaborate on how
you imagine such a feature behaving?
--
----- 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
